Resettlement Planning Document
This social safeguards due diligence report has been prepared by the Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency, New Delhi for the Asian Development Bank and is made publicly available in accordance with ADB’s Public Communications Policy (2011). It does not necessarily reflect the views of ADB. This social safeguards due diligence report is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB's Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature. In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area.
Project Number: 46268-002 February 2018
IND: Clean Energy Finance Investment Program - Tranche 1 Subproject: 100.8MW Wind Power Project at Beluguppa, Anantapur District, Andhra Pradesh
Submitted by
Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency, New Delhi
1
DUE DILIGENCE REPORT
ON
SOCIAL SAFEGUARDS
(LOAN 3186 IND: CLEAN ENERGY INVESTMENT PROGRAM)
Subproject:
100.8MW Wind Power Project
at Beluguppa, Anantapur District, Andhra Pradesh
Subproject Developer:
Orange Uravakonda Wind Power Pvt Ltd
(Subsidiary of Orange Renewable Power Private Limited)
Prepared by M K MOHANTY, ADB TA, Social Safeguard Specialist
Review by
RUCHIKA DRALL, Environmental & Social Officer, ESSU, IREDA
Approved by
KHEKIHO YEPTHO, Head ESSU & Compliance Officer, IREDA
2
Table of Content
NO. DESCRIPTION PAGE NO. 1 Introduction 3 2 Subproject Description 3 3 Subproject Status 5 4 Scope of Review and Methodology 5 5 Social Safeguard Issues under the Subproject 6 6 Social Safeguard Categorization and Rationale 11 7 Social Safeguard Requirement for the Subproject 12 8 Other Subproject Specific Issues 13 9 Public Consultation under the Subproject 13
10 Grievance Redress Mechanism for the Subproject 13 11 Employment Opportunity from the Subproject 13 12 Community Development Initiatives by the Subproject 13 13 Summary Due Diligence Findings 14 14 Conclusion and Recommendations 15
NO. Annexure
1 ESIA of the project 2 NOC from Panchayat 3 Sample Sale Deed 4 Social Safeguard Screening Checklist & Categorization
3
SOCIAL DUE DILIGENCE REPORT
Subproject: 100.8 MW Wind Power Project at Beluguppa in Anantapur District of Andhra Pradesh
Developer: Orange Uravakonda Wind Power Private Limited (OUWPPL) an SPV of Orange
Renewable Power Private Limited
1. Introduction
Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Limited (IREDA) is the single largest renewable energy financier in India and applied for ADB loan to fund as a part of its overall lending portfolio, to private sector renewable energy and energy efficiency subprojects in India, including small scale wind, biomass, small hydro, solar, cogeneration, and energy efficiency.
IREDA’s mandate is to minimize the energy sector’s negative environmental impact by promoting cleaner and more environmentally friendly technologies, and thus is committed to avoid and mitigate adverse environmental impacts, if any, resulting from the projects it finances. In order to identify and effectively address potential impacts from projects funded with the ADB line of credit, IREDA has formulated and adopted an Environment and Social Safeguard Unit (ESSU), which is in compliance with Indian national laws and Asian Development Bank (ADB) Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS) 2009. The objective of the ESSU is to guide IREDA’s actions to safeguard against adverse environmental and social impacts for sub-projects using ADB’s funds.
Keeping in view the main objective of the ESSU, ADB social safeguard requirements and in confirmation with the national and local policy and legal framework, a social due diligence study has been carried out for the subproject i.e. 100 MW wind power plant in Andhra Pradesh being promoted by Orange Uravakonda Wind Power Private Limited (OUWPPL) an SPV of Orange Renewable Power Private Limited.
2. Subproject Description
The proposed project site is Beluguppa village of Anantapur District of Andhra Pradesh. The project site spreads across eight villages’ viz. Beluguppa, Srirangapuram, Thagguparthi, Yeragudi, Avulenna, Y. Rengapuram, Duddekunta and Narinjagundlapalli of Uravakonda Mandal in Anantapur District. The project site comprises low productive agricultural land depended on monsoon, part of which is being used by locals for farming with tube well water. Land use of the land selected for WTGs as per government records is agricultural for which certificate of conversion to Non Agricultural (NA) land use has been obtained.
OUWPPL has contracted Suzlon Gujarat Wind Park Ltd. to provide turnkey solutions for micro- siting, wind resource analysis, supply, erection, commissioning and operation & maintenance of the project WTGs. The project will involve installation of 48 numbers of WTGs of 2.1 MW capacity each, totaling to a capacity of 100.8 MW. The map of the project site with WTG locations is provided in Figure 1.
4
Figure: 1 Project Site Map
M/s Top View infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Sai Ram Land Developers Pvt. Ltd. are two sub- contractors acting as land aggregators for the project was responsible for procuring land through willing buyer-willing seller basis after paying the proper market value to the original land owner in the name of Suzlon. Administering the Agreement to Sale (ATS) and Sale Deed with the original landowners the land purchasing and registration process has been completed for the subproject. Finally the land is transferred in the name of OUWPPL from Suzlon.
The power generated from the wind farm shall be transmitted to state govt. 400kV/220kV (sub- station) situated at Mopidi village for which OUWPPL has signed a power purchase agreement
5
with Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company Limited (APSPDCL) at wind preferential Tariff as determined by Andhra Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (APERC) from time to time for the specified control period.
Suzlon Gujarat Wind Park Ltd. is responsible for laying of transmission line from polling station to State Government owned 220/400 kV Mopidi sub-station and the transmission line will be used as shared infrastructure by various developers including OUWPPL. OUWPPL will pay proportionate fees to transmit the power to Mopidi sub-station. Finally the transmission line will be handed over to the Andhra Pradesh Transmission Company Limited (APTRANSCO) for operation and maintainance.
The project requirement in terms of various components and activities involves the following:
• Procurement/direct purchasing of land through Land aggregator
• Installation of 48 wind turbines with a unit generating capacity of 2.1 MW each, totaling a generation capacity of 100.8 MW;
• Electrical connection with feeder underground cable from the turbines, to the distribution transformers and a connection to the substation.
• Construction of access roads and internal roads
• Power evacuation to 220/400 kV Mopidi substation
3. Subproject Status
As on 31st March 2017, the status of project implementation is as follows:
• Wind Resource Assessment completed;
• Micro-siting has been completed;
• Procurement of land for all components are fully completed;
• Demarcations and pathway finalization completed;
• Soil testing completed for all the site purchased;
• Pooling Substation and zero point storage yard completed;
• Approach and internal roads completed to WTG clusters and clusters to individual WTGs;
• All 48 WTGs towers erected and stringing completed;
• Site office of ANPWPL established and Project staff mobilization completed;
• Project is already commissioned.
4. Scope of Review and Methodology
This social due diligence report is prepared based on review of various subproject documents, consultation with developers, field staff and on site observation. The documents reviewed for the subproject includes Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) Report and Inception Report, Sale deed and NoC from Village etc. Site visit conducted during April-2017 and Nov-2017 and consulted with the field staff of Project Developer and local people.
The ESIA study for the proposed subproject has been conducted as per applicable national regulations in India. The study includes collection and collation of baseline environmental and socio-economic information of the study area, assessment of potential project level environmental and social impacts and development of project specific mitigation and management plans. The ESIA report for the subproject is attached in Annexure 1.
6
5. Social Safeguard Issues under the Subproject
The social safeguard issues identified through the social due diligence process are discussed in the following section.
5.1 Land Requirement under the Subproject
The land requirement for the subproject was for tower locations and approach roads. Total land requirement for the purpose was 146.95 acres. The land requirements for various locations are presented in the Table: 1 below.
Table 1: Land Requirement for the Subproject
Sl. No.
Village Taluka District Area
(Acres) Name of Land Owner including
Shareholders
1
Srirangpuram
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Kummathi Ramanjaneyulu S/o Chendrayudu
2. Vuruvakili Rami Reddy, S/o Hanumanthappa
2
Srirangapuram
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. B.Venkata Ramananda Reddy S/o Yerrappa 2. B.Srinivasulu Reddy S/o Obi Reddy
3
Beluguppa
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Yennapusalla Pedda Kullaya Reddy S/o Chenna Rayudu 2. Yennapusalla Pedda Kullaya Reddy S/o Chenna Rayudu
4 Beluguppa Belugappa Anantpur 3.05 1. Uparra Oligappa S/o Chinna Anjinappa
5 Beluguppa Belugappa Anantpur
3.05 1. Jakkannagari Vijaya, W/o Eswara Reddy
6
Beluguppa
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Jakkanagari Jayarami Reddy and his wife Kavitha 2. Jakannagari Subadhramma W/o Sreeramulu 3. Jakkannagari Janakiram S/o Sreeramulu
7
Beluguppa
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Chekke Siddanna S/o Siddanna 2. Chekke Venkateswarlu S/o Chekke 3. Chekke Thippeswamy S/o Chekke
8
Narinjagundlapalli
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Pinjari Vannurappa 2. Khasimsab 3. Sakarappa 4. Kullayappa 5. Kummatthi Narsimha Reddy 6. K. Venkatesulu 7. K. Sreenivasulu
9
Thagguparthi
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Masineni Lakshmidevi W/o Late M.Ravanappa 2. Vanaja s/o Late M. Ravanappa 3. Ravichandra s/o M. Ravanappa 4. Dabbara Narayanamma W/o Late Pedda Parvathaiah
10
Beluguppa
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Galibe Sumangalamma 2. Kallasetti Manjula D/o Galibe Sumangalamma 3. Galibe Nagendra Prasad S/o Galibe Rudranna
7
11 Srirangapuram Belugappa Anantpur
3.05 1. Boya Lakshmi 2. M Sanjeeva Reddy s/o Muthyala Reddy
12 Duddekunta Belugappa Anantpur
3.05 1. Jarugula Chandra Sekhar s/o Jarugula Venkateswarlu
13
Yerragudi
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Malapati Venkata Narayana s/o Late Narayanappa 2. M.Manjula W/o Venkata Narayana 3. Malapati Sharmila Chowdary
14 Yerragudi Belugappa Anantpur
3.05 1. Morusu Pedda Ramaiah 2. Morusu Kamalakar Chowdary
15
Y.Rampuram
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Malapati Adimurthy 2. Bhagyamma 3. Mounika 4. Malapati Narappa 5. Konanki Gopal 6. Pallavi 7. Konanki Radhakrishna Murthy
16
Avulenna
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Andra Kondaiah Chowdary 2. Narayana Swamy 3. Ramamohan 4. Padmavathi 5. Andra Varadakshi Naidu
17
Avulenna
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Gonuguntla Sankaranarayana 2. Gonuguntla Anasuyamma 3. Santhosh Kumar 4. Sravan Kumar
18
Thagguparthi
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Sompalli Rajendra Prasad 2. S K Ramanjaneyulu 3. Malliakarjuna 4. Chandrasekhar 5. Dhanunjaya 6. Yerrappa 7. S Lakshmi w/o Late. Ravindra
19
Beluguppa
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Boya Vannuru Swamy s/o Narasimhappa 2. Boya Mallikarjuna s/o Narasimhappa
20
Srirangapuram
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Ustili Rami Reddy 2. Ustili Kamalamma 3. Ustili Yamuna 4. Ustil Suvarna
21
Beluguppa
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Jakkannagari Rameswara Reddy 2. Jakkannagari Sandhya 3. Rajasekhar Reddy 4. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy 5. Ramamohan Reddy
22
Beluguppa
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. B.Shakunthala 2. Belagallu Prabhakar 3. Boya Shantha Kumar 4. Boya Thippe Rudra 5. Malapati Savithramma 6. Yennapusala Hanumantha Reddy
8
23
Beluguppa
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. B.Ramanjaneyulu 2. Kuruba Ramanjaneyulu 3. Buligondla Ramalakshmi 4. Kuruba Ramalakshmi 5. Buligondla Vannuramma 6. Kuruba Vannuramma w/o Late Thimmappa 7. Kuruba Jayaramulu s/o Hanumanthappa 8. Hanumantharayudu s/o Jayaramulu 9. Kuruba Ramu s/o Jayaramulu
24
Thagguparthi
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Chilamakuri Thiruamalesu s/o Rangaiah 2. Chilamakuri Ramanjinamma w/o Ramaswamy 3. Bodapati Chandrakala 4. C. Venkatalalshmamma w/o Rangaiah
25
Thagguparthi
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Meti Chinna Yerri Swamy 2. Meti Pedda Yerri Swamy 3. Meti Jayaramulu 4. Meti Gopal 5. Dabbara Narayana Swamy 6. Nirmala 7. Bhuvaneswara Chakravarthi
26
Srirangapuram
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Dovalo Kummathi 2. Jayarami Reddy 3. Govinda Reddy 4. Ramanjaneyulu 5. Narayana Reddy 6. Kummathi Sunil 7. Bhaskara Reddy 8. D.K. Lakshmidevi 9. D.K. Suresh 10. Lalsekhar Reddy 11. Chennakesavulu
27
Ankamaplli
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Morusu Narendra Naidu 2. Morusu Obula Naidu 3. Padmavathi w/o Obula naidu
28
Beluguppa
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Andra Sreeramulu s/o Venkataswamy 2. Andra Sreenivasulu 3. Andra Chakrapani 4. Andra Gopal s/o Lata Andra Venkataravanappa
29 Y.Rampuram Belugappa Anantpur
3.05 1. Marusu Raghuramulu 2. Marusu Jayaramulu
30 Beluguppa Belugappa Anantpur
3.16 1. Kalekurthi Sanjeeva Reddy 2. Kalekurthi Bheema Reddy
31
Thagguparthi
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.19
1. Egiddi Lakshmakka 2. Netyam Venkatalakshmi 3. Bodapati Chandrakala 4. Umapathi
32
Beluguppa
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Padma Thippeswamy s/o Venkataramanappa 2. Boya Thippaiah s/o Marenna
9
33
Srirangapuram
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Patil Lakshmi Devi w/o Patil Thimma Reddy 2. Patil Sreenivasa Reddy 3. Patil Satyanarayana Reddy s/o Patil Thimma Reddy 4. Reddipalli Hanumantha Reddy s/o Thippa Reddy 5. Janardhana Reddy s/o Reddipalli Hanumantha Reddy 6. Reddipalli Krishna Reddy 7. Diwakar Reddy s/o Reddipalli Krishna Reddy 8. Maruti Prasad s/o Reddipalli Krishna Reddy
34
Duddekunta
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Paineti Vani w/o Late Venugopal 2. Konaki Yerrapa s/o Pedda Pullaiah 3. Konanki Ranganayakulu s/o Konaki Yerrapa 4. Konanki Somshekhara s/o Konaki Yerrapa 5. Thammineni Naresh s/o Late Pedda Yerriswamy
35
Yerragudi
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. G Mallikarjuana s/o Rachanna 2. G Rajeshwari w/o G Mallikarjuna 3. G Veeresh s/o Rachanna 4. G Manohar s/o Rachanna 5. G Rachanna s/o Eswarappa
36
Yerragudi
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Chimbili Bhaskar Reddy s/o Ramachandraiah Reddy 2. Chimbili Trivedi Naidu s/o Ramachandraiah Reddy 3. Venkatesulu s/o Ramachandraiah Reddy 4. Chimbili Venkatappa s/o Late Chimbili Narayanappa 5. Chimbili Anil s/o Lokanath Chowdary
37
Beluguppa
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Keklekurthi Dhanunjaya Reddy s/o Late Sanjeeva Reddy 2. Kamireddy Yasoda w/oo Dhanunjaya Reddy 3. Kalekurthi Gopal Reddy s/o Late Shankar Reddy 4. Rajula Saritha w/o Rajula Sudhakar Reddy 5. Rajula Sudhakar Reddy s/o Bheema Reddy 6. Palavi Jyothi w/o Radha Reddy 7. Palavi Radha Reddy s/o Govind Reddy
8. Kalekurthi Thimmakka w/o Narayana Reddy
38
Srirangapuram
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.09
1. Gangavaram Akkamma w/o Prakash Reddy
2. Bodimalla Rammi Reddy s/o Hanumappa 3. Bodimalla Nagendra Reddy s/o Bodimalla Rammi Reddy 4. Bodimalla Rami Reddy s/o Late Obi Reddy 5. Bodimalla Sivamma w/o Bodimalla Rami Reddy
6. Bodimalla Prasanth s/o Bodimalla Rami Reddy
10
39
Beluguppa
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.18
1. Nara Radhika 2. Nara Sivaramakrishna 3. Chimbili Adilakshmi 4. Chimbili Venkatappa
40 Yerragudi Belugappa Anantpur
3.18 1. Chandrashekhar Reddy s/o Late Neelakanta Reddy
41
Yerragudi
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Kunduru Vijayalakshmi w/o Late Diwakar Reddy 2. Chippagiri Thimma Reddy s/o Rami Reddy 3. Chippagiri Vijayalakshmi w/o Chippagiri Thimma Reddy
42
Beluguppa
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Konanki Srinivasulu s/o Konanki Venkatanayudu 2. Konanki Praveen Kumar s/o Konanki Venkatanayudu
43
Ankamaplli
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Sontela Kuruba Yerikilappa 2. Sontela Yerriswamy 3. S K Yerriswamy 4. Sontela Chinna Narayanappa 5. K C Narayanappa s/o Hanumanthappa 6. Sontela Narayanappa s/o Hanumanthappa 7. Chinna Hanumanthappa s/o Sontela Narayanappa 8. Sontela Kuruba Mallikarjuna s/o Sontela Narayanappa 9. Sontela Kuruba s/o Sontela Narayanappa 10. K C Narayanappa s/o Yerikilappa 11. S K Sudhakar s/o Yerikilappa
44
Beluguppa
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Boya Uligamma w/o Late Thippaiah 2. Boya Gangappa s/o Late Thippaiah 3. Gulapalli 4. Gollapalli 5. Golla Lakshmi devi 6. Lakshmidevamma w/o Late Chennaiah 7. Gollapalli Ravindra s/o Late Chennaiah 8. G Venugopal s/o Late Chennaiah
45 Srirangapuram Belugappa Anantpur 3.05 1. Ediga Malikarjuna s/o Late Nagappa
46
Y.Rampuram
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Morusu Nagabhushana s/o Late Obulaiah 2. Morusu Nirmala w/o Morusu Nagabhushana
47
Beluguppa
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Kethireddi Vinod /Vinod Kumar 2. Kethireddi Obi Reddy 3. Boya Duggeppagri Marenna
48
Narinjagundlapalli
Belugappa
Anantpur
3.05
1. Boya Dasari Sreenivasulu 2. Boya Dasari Nagaraju 3. Boya Nagappa s/o Bheemappa 4. Boya Vanuramma w/o Late Mareppa 5. Boya Ramesh
Total 146.95
11
The developer has purchased the land through the land aggregator from the landowners on willing seller - willing buyer basis. The developer has obtained the NOC from Gram Panchayat and villages from where land is purchased to establish the plant and the copy of this NOC is provided in Annexure 2. The sample sale deed agreement administered for land purchasing is attached in Annexure 3. Based on the assessment of sale deed agreements, it is confirmed that the land has been purchased from the owners directly clarifying the purpose of purchase and the land register has verified and certified that the land is encumbrance free and without any kind of litigation.
5.2 Involuntary Resettlement Issues under the Subproject
Since there is no compulsory land acquisition involved the subproject as the land is directly purchased from the landowners on willing buyer – willing seller basis, there does not arise any issue of involuntary resettlement. The landowners have directly sold their land to the developer and the lands are either barren or low-productive agricultural land. During the land identification and purchase process attention has been paid and avoided purchasing of land from small and marginal farmer. Thus the landowners have only sold part of their land and not suffered any major livelihood loss. During the site visit it was observed that the land percales purchased for the subproject are away from the settlement area and therefore does not occurred any physical displacement.
5.3 Indigenous Peoples Issues under the Subproject
According to the Census of India 2011 statistics, Scheduled Tribe (ST) population of Anantpur district is below 3%. It is confirmed from the census information that no indigenous people are present in the subproject-affected villages and none of the land purchased for the subproject belongs to the ST community. Hence, there is no issue of indigenous people has been identified under the subproject. The project outcome is not directly benefiting the ST community as the power generated from the plat will be connected to transmission grid only and does not have any role in distribution system. However, at larger level, the power generation will definitely strengthen the power supply system of the area as a whole and hence indirectly benefit all communities including ST in the area.
6. Social Safeguard Categorization and Rationale
On the basis of the review of project information and site observation, the Social Safeguard Screening Checklist (Annexure 4) was completed as per the requirement set forth in IREDA’s Environmental and Social management System (ESSU). Based on the social safeguard checklist, it was established that the subproject is categorized as “Category-C” from both Involuntary Resettlement and Indigenous Peoples safeguard point of view. The Involuntary Resettlement Categorization form and the Indigenous Peoples Categorization form are attached in Annexure 4.
The rationale behind the social safeguard categorization as “C” i.e. the subproject does not require any further specific actions so far as the social safeguard point of view is because the subproject does not involve any involuntary acquisition of private land and does not have any negative impacts on people including indigenous community. The photograph of the subproject site is presented below in Figure-2.
12
Figure-2: Photograph of the Subproject Site
7. Social Safeguard Requirement for the Subproject
As per the Environmental and Social Management System (ESMS) adopted by IREDA, followings are the generic social safeguard requirements for a subproject to qualify for financing under ADB lines of credit:
• The subproject is not among the Prohibited Investment Activities List (PIAL) of the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS) 2009.
• The subproject with potential significant social impacts are complies with Safeguard Requirements of the ADB Safeguard Policy Statement (2009).
• The subproject complies with the national laws, regulations, and related to involuntary resettlement, land acquisition, indigenous peoples/ scheduled tribes and management of physical cultural resources.
• The subproject addresses the gender and development issues and needs of disadvantaged and vulnerable groups.
• The subproject's contracts with civil works contractors, subcontractors and other providers of goods and services ensure provisions to employ local labor, whenever possible, and ensure compliance with ADB's social protection requirements.
Keeping in view the subproject context, the specific social safeguard requirements includes the following:
13
• Carry out social impact assessment for the subproject
• Carry out consultation with local community
• Engage an independent external party to validate and document the negotiation and land purchase process
• Make a gender assessment
• Disclosure of the social impact assessment and social management plan
• Establish grievance redressal mechanism
8. Other Subproject Specific Issues
The other specific social issues like consultation and disclosure, grievance redressal mechanism, employment opportunity from the subproject and corporate social responsibility etc. discussed in the following section.
9. Public Consultation under the Subproject
During various stages of subproject preparation, public consultation meetings were carried out involving various stakeholders. The project developer has informed the villagers about the project during very inception stage. The stakeholders engaged in the consultation process included village panchayat, village community, landowners, local administration, revenue officers, and various line departments. However, there is no clear documentation on consultation. The subproject ESIA document is not properly disclosed to the stakeholders.
10. Grievance Redress Mechanism for the Subproject
OUWPPL does not have any formal stakeholder engagement plan or grievance redressal mechanism. However, during the site visit, it is observed that a complain register was available in their site office but found no complain registered in it.
11. Employment Opportunity from the Subproject
The subproject has created employment opportunities for local people and utilizing local resources in terms of employment of local laborers, hiring machines and manpower for transportation of materials and equipment during construction.
Mostly local unskilled laborers engaged during construction were local people. At present, the operation and maintenance service team engaged by the developer has at least 15 local villagers and another 6 local persons are engaged for providing security services.
12. Community Development Initiatives by the Subproject
As a part of its corporate social responsibility (CSR) program, the contractor has assessed some local needs and indented the following activities to be taken up as a part of Community Development Plan for the villages near the plant.
• Helping setting up medical facilities in the villages, organizing health check-up camps
• Upgrading Infrastructure in schools like, provision of Library and Computer rooms, furniture and fans in schools.
• Strengthening of existing roads in the villages during construction period and post construction period
14
• Conduct veterinary camps for livestock in the project villages.
The contractor has already implemented some of the community development initiatives like supplying of kits to school children, repairing and maintenance of common road used for the plant and villages and organizing health check-up camps in the villages etc.
13. Summary Due Diligence Findings
Based on the subproject assessment, the summary social safeguard due diligence findings are listed below:
• The subproject does not involve involuntary land acquisition and resettlement issue as the land required for the subproject were directly purchased from the landowners on willing seller willing buyer basis.
• Social impact assessment has been carried out under the subproject but it does not specifically address the issues as per ADB requirement.
• No public consultation has been carried out for the subproject and the social assessment report has not disclosed to the communities.
• There does not have any specific grievance redressal mechanism established under the subproject except placing a complain register at site.
During the due diligence visit in 14th November 2017, 12 number of landowners including their legal hire were consulted at various villages and confirmed that the land purchase process was very much transparent and they had got a good deal in comparison to the prevailing market price. The summary consultation findings and list of participants are presented in the Table: 2 below and the photographs are presented in Figure: 2.
Table: 2 Summary Consultation Findings and list of Participants
Sl. No. Name of Participants Village Summary Findings
1 Mr. Jaysimha Belaguppa • After land survey, the contractor directly approached the farmers and start negotiating for the land.
• During the negotiation process the farmers had a fair chance of bargaining.
• The got a good price in comparison to the prevailing market price
• Even more farmers in the villages are ready to sell their land because low productivity of land.
• All the farmers have additional land with them
• The farmers have utilised the money for their loan repayment, house construction, investment in new business or maintaining a part of it as fixed deposit in the bank.
2 Mr. Mrityunjay Belaguppa 3 Mr. S. K. Siddhya Belaguppa 4 Mr. Pratap Rangaiah Thagguparthy 5 Mr. Ampanna Yerri Swami Thagguparthy 6 Mr. Narendra Reddy Srirangapuram 7 Mr. K. Sundarya Thagguparthy 8 Mr. Narayana Swami Avulenna 9 Ms. Nirmala Belaguppa
10 Ms. Lakshmidevi Belaguppa 11 Mr. V R Reddy Srirangapuram
12 Mr. Yerrappa Belaguppa
15
Figure-2: Consultation with Landowners at Subproject Site
14. Conclusion and Recommendations
The social due diligence study of current subproject reveals that there will not be any adverse social impact due to the intervention. The subproject is categorized as Category "C" form social safeguard point of view. The private land required for the subproject is directly purchased from landowners by paying market value to the landowners and no compulsory acquisition of land occurs in the subproject, therefore no involuntary resettlement occurs.
As per the ESMS requirement, no further action including resettlement planning, livelihood planning or indigenous peoples planning is required for the subproject. However, the developer will continue to engage the local villagers throughout the operation period and carry out CSR activities in the area.
Based on the findings of due diligence study the subproject is recommended for funding under the proposed project using ADB line of credit. IREDA will ensure compliance of ESSU and carry out periodic monitoring of the social safeguard issue and report to ADB as agreed in the ESMS.
ANNEXURE 1 Copy of ESIA Report
The Business of Sustainability
OUWEPL: Environmental and Social
Impact Assessment for 100.8 MW Wind
Power Project: Beluguppa, Anantapur
District, Andhra Pradesh, India
Final Report
August 2016
www.erm.com
Orange Uravakonda Wind Power
Private Limited
FINAL REPORT
Orange Uravakonda Wind Power Private
Limited
OUWEPL: Environmental and
Social Impact Assessment for 100.8
MW Wind Power Project:
Beluguppa, Anantapur District,
Andhra Pradesh, India
07 August 2016
Reference # I11419/0330571
Prepared by : Rohan Fernandes, Pooja Menon
and Chaitanya Krishna
This report has been prepared by ERM India Private Limited a member of Environmental Resources Management Group of companies, with all reasonable skill, care and diligence within the terms of the Contract with the client, incorporating our General Terms and Conditions of Business and taking account of the resources devoted to it by agreement with the client.
We disclaim any responsibility to the client and others in respect of any matters outside the scope of the above.
This report is confidential to the client and we accept no responsibility of whatsoever nature to third parties to whom this report, or any part thereof, is made known. Any such party relies on the report at their own risk.
Reviewed by:
Manish Singh
Principal Consultant
Karunakaran
Nagalingam
Principal Consultant
Approved by:
Neena Singh
Partner
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 BASIS OF THE REPORT 1
1.2 APPLICABLE REFERENCE FRAMEWORK 1
1.3 ORANGE RENEWABLE POWER PVT. LTD. 2
1.4 OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT 2
1.5 PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT 7
1.6 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY 7
1.7 SCOPE OF THE STUDY 7
1.8 APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY 8
1.8.1 Preliminary Discussions with Project Proponent 9
1.8.2 Scoping Study 9
1.8.3 Document Review 9
1.8.4 Site Survey and Preliminary Consultations 9
1.8.5 Environmental Baseline Data Collection 10
1.8.6 Stakeholder Consultation 10
1.8.7 Impact Assessment 11
1.8.8 Environmental and Social Management Plan 11
1.9 LIMITATIONS 11
1.9.1 Uses of the Report 12
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 14
2.1 PROJECT SETTING 14
2.1.1 Project location and Setting 14
2.2 LAND REQUIREMENTS 23
2.3 LAND DETAILS 23
2.3.1 Project related land procurement and specific issues 24
2.3.2 Land details and existing procurement status for specific components 27
2.3.3 Land Purchase Process 28
2.3.4 Stakeholder engagement and GRM 29
2.3.5 Labour 30
2.4 PROJECT COMPONENTS 30
2.4.1 Wind Turbine Generators (WTGs) 30
2.4.2 Wind Farm 30
2.4.3 Pooling Sub Station and Power Evacuation Arrangements 31
2.4.4 Supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA)/ Condition Monitoring
System (CMS) 33
2.4.5 Storage Yard 33
2.4.6 Batching Plant 33
2.4.7 Access Road and Site Access 34
2.5 PROJECT ACTIVITIES 35
2.5.1 Planning Phase 35
2.5.2 Construction 35
2.5.3 Operations & Maintenance 36
2.5.4 Decommissioning 36
2.6 RESOURCE REQUIREMNTS FOR THE PROJECT 37
2.6.1 Water Requirement 37
2.6.2 Raw Materials and Equipment 37
2.6.3 Fuel requirement and Storage 38
2.6.4 Power Requirement 39
2.6.5 Pollution Control-Embedded Measures 39
2.6.6 Air Emissions 39
2.6.7 Noise Emissions 40
2.6.8 Waste Management 40
2.6.9 Wastewater Management 41
2.6.10 Fire Safety and Security 42
2.7 PROJECT ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE 43
2.7.1 Orange Uravakonda Wind Power Pvt. Ltd. 43
2.7.2 Suzlon Gujarat Wind Park Ltd. 43
2.8 CORPORATE POLICIES 44
2.8.1 Suzlon Gujarat Wind Park Ltd. 44
3 ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK 45
3.1 INTRODUCTION 45
3.1 PERMITTING STATUS OF THE PROJECT 45
3.1.1 EIA Notification (2006) and its amendments 45
3.1.2 Central Pollution Control Board 45
3.1.3 Andhra Pradesh Wind Power Policy of 2015 45
3.2 INSTITUTION FRAMEWORK- ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES 46
3.3 APPLICABLE REGULATORY/ POLICY FRAMEWORK 49
3.4 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS 52
3.5 INTERNATIONAL SAFEGUARD REQUIREMENTS 52
3.5.1 IFC Requirements 52
4 SCREENING AND SCOPING 56
4.1 SCREENING METHODOLOGY 56
4.1.1 Kick-off Meeting 56
4.1.2 Document Review 56
4.2 PROJECT CATEGORISATION 57
4.2.1 Equator Principles Financial Institutions (EFPI) and International
Performance Standards (IFC) 57
4.3 SCOPING METHODOLOGY 58
4.4 SCOPING RESULTS 59
4.4.1 Cumulative Impacts 59
5 ENVIRONMENTAL ECOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL BASELINE 64
5.1 LOCATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE SETTING 64
5.2 AREA OF INFLUENCE 64
5.2.1 Study Area 64
5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE METHODOLOGY 67
5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE FINDINGS 68
5.4.1 Land cover and use 68
5.4.2 Local Topographical Features 71
5.4.3 Geology and Hydrogeology 74
5.4.4 Hydrology and Drainage Pattern 76
5.4.5 Climate and Meteorology 78
5.4.6 Natural Hazards 79
5.4.7 Ambient Air Quality 86
5.4.8 Noise Quality 92
5.4.9 Water Quality 95
5.4.10 Soil Quality 103
5.5 ECOLOGICAL BASELINE 106
5.5.1 Objectives 106
5.5.2 Study area 107
5.5.3 Approach and Methodology 107
5.5.4 Floral Assessment 109
5.5.5 Faunal Assessment 110
5.5.6 Protected Areas 120
5.5.7 Migratory Routes 121
5.6 SOCIO ECONOMIC BASELINE 122
5.6.1 Study Area 122
5.6.2 Approach and Methodology 122
5.6.3 Administrative set up of the Study Area 124
5.6.4 Demographic Profile 124
5.6.5 Education profile 127
5.6.6 Land Profile 131
5.6.7 Occupation and Livelihood 133
5.6.8 Drinking Water Supply 139
5.6.9 Irrigation 141
5.6.10 Health Infrastructure 141
5.6.11 Others physical infrastructure 142
5.6.12 Civil Society Organisations 143
6 STAKEHOLDER MAPPING AND IDENTIFICATION 144
6.1 INTRODUCTION 144
6.2 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION AND DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT FOR THE
PROJECT 144
6.3 STAKEHOLDER CATEGORISATION 145
6.4 APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY FOR STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS 145
6.5 STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS 146
7 IMPACT ASSESSMENT 153
7.1 INTRODUCTION 153
7.2 SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT 153
7.3 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 153
7.4 KEY POTENTIAL IMPACTS 159
7.4.1 Key Environmental Impacts 159
7.4.2 Key Ecological Impacts 159
7.4.3 Key Social Impacts 159
7.5 KEY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 159
7.5.1 Change in land use 159
7.5.2 Impact on Water Resources 175
7.5.3 Impact on Air Quality 183
7.5.4 Aesthetics and Landscape concerns 186
7.5.5 Occupational health and Safety of Workers 190
7.5.6 Ambient Noise Levels 194
7.6 KEY ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS 204
7.6.2 Impacts during construction Phase 209
7.6.3 Impacts during Operation Phase 217
7.6.4 Cumulative Impact Assessment for Flying Fauna 223
7.7 KEY SOCIAL IMPACTS 225
7.7.1 Impacts to local communities 225
7.7.2 Economic Loss/Displacement due to selling of land 239
7.7.3 Impact on local employment opportunity 241
7.7.4 Social Development through Corporate Social responsibility (CSR) Initiatives242
7.7.5 Cumulative environmental and social impacts 243
8 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 244
8.1 INTRODUCTION 244
8.2 OUWPPL’S ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE 244
8.2.1 OUWPPL’s EHS Management 244
8.3 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 245
8.3.1 Environmental, Health and Safety Department (EHS Department) 245
8.4 INSPECTION, MONITORING AND AUDIT 245
8.5 REPORTING AND DOCUMENTATION 246
8.5.1 ESMP Review and Amendments 247
8.6 TRAINING PROGRAMME AND CAPACITY BUILDING 247
8.6.1 Environmental and Social Management Plan 248
9 IMPACT SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 259
9.1 INTRODUCTION 259
9.2 IMPACTS REQUIRING DETAILED ASSESSMENT 259
9.3 CONCLUSION 260
List of Table
Table 1.1 Salient Features of the Project: Snapshot of the Project 3
Table 1.2 Contractors associated with Suzlon for the Project 3
Table 1.3 Structure of the report 12
Table 1.4 Annexes in the report 13
Table 2.1 WTG Profiling of the 100.8 MW Project (up to a distance of 500 m from the
WTG) 16
Table 2.2 Summary of the land required for the Project 24
Table 2.3 Technical Specifications of Suzlon S111 turbine 30
Table 2.4 List and quantity of raw material to be utilised for the WTG foundation
activities during the construction phase (tonnes per WTG) 37
Table 2.5 Equipment type and quantity to be utilised during the construction phase 38
Table 2.6 Waste Generated, their sources and method of disposal 41
Table 3.1 Categorisation of wind power projects as per A.P. Wind Power Policy, 2015 45
Table 3.2 Enforcement Agencies relevant to the Project 46
Table 3.3 Applicable environmental and social legislative framework for wind power
projects 50
Table 3.4 IFC Performance Standards 54
Table 4.1 Potential interactions matrix for the 100.8 MW Project, near the village of
Beluguppa. 60
Table 4.2 Interactions identified that are likely to result in significant impacts 61
Table 4.3 Scoped- out interactions during the proposed Project's life cycle 63
Table 5.1 Primary Baseline Data Collection 67
Table 5.2 Secondary Baseline Data Collection 68
Table 5.3 Land use break detail of the Project 69
Table 5.4 Climatological Data, Anantapur 78
Table 5.5 Predominant Wind Direction 79
Table 5.6 Details of Ambient Air Monitoring Stations 86
Table 5.7 Details of Methods and Detection Limits for different Air Quality Parameters88
Table 5.8 Ambient Air Quality in the Study Area 88
Table 5.9 Details of Noise Sampling Locations 92
Table 5.10 Noise Level in the Study Area 92
Table 5.11 Details of Water Sampling Locations 95
Table 5.12 Surface Water Quality observed during the monitoring Period 98
Table 5.13 Primary Water Quality Criteria for Designated-Best-Use-Classes 99
Table 5.14 Groundwater Quality observed during the monitoring Period 101
Table 5.15 Details of soil sampling location 103
Table 5.16 Analysis report of the soil sample (So1) 104
Table 5.17 Vegetation Classification of the Region 107
Table 5.18 Water bodies surveyed in the study area 108
Table 5.19 Time utilization for ecology assessment 110
Table 5.20 Amphibians reported from the study area 111
Table 5.21 Reptiles reported from the study area 111
Table 5.22 Avifaunal Species observed in the Study Area 114
Table 5.23 Avifaunal Species recorded in the Study Area 118
Table 5.24 Details of Mammals recorded from the Study area 120
Table 5.25 Demographic profile of the study region 124
Table 5.26 Demography of the study area villages 125
Table 5.27 Religion wise classification of data 127
Table 5.28 SSC and intermediate results of Anantapur district 128
Table 5.29 Schools facilities in study region 129
Table 5.30 Hostel facilities provided by government in study region 130
Table 5.31 Land use classification of villages under study area 132
Table 5.32 Land holding pattern of the study region 133
Table 5.33 Occupational pattern of the villages under study area 134
Table 5.34 Drinking water source availability 140
Table 5.35 Health care facilities in study region 141
Table 6.1 Overview of Disclosure and stakeholder consultation requirement 144
Table 6.2 Stakeholder Group categorisation 145
Table 6.3 Stakeholder Significance and Engagement Requirement 145
Table 6.4 Assessing significance of stakeholder for the Project 147
Table 6.5 Summary of overall stakeholder influence 152
Table 7.1 Impact Characteristic Terminology 154
Table 7.2 Impact Type Definitions 155
Table 7.3 Definitions for Likelihood Designations 155
Table 7.4 Sensitivity Assessment Criteria for Land Use 160
Table 7.5 Criteria for Impact Magnitude for Assessment of Impact to Land Use 160
Table 7.6 Periodic alteration of land use 161
Table 7.7 Impact on land use as a result of the Project 162
Table 7.8: Sensitivity Assessment Criteria for Soil quality (compaction, erosion and
contamination) 163
Table 7.9 Criteria for Impact Magnitude for Assessment of Impact to Soil 164
Table 7.10 Impacts on land and soil environment during the project life cycle 164
Table 7.11 Soil Erosion impacts during construction phase 165
Table 7.12 Soil Compaction impacts during construction phase 166
Table 7.13 Impact on land due to improper waste disposal during construction phase 168
Table 7.14 Soil contamination due to Leaks/spills during construction phase 170
Table 7.15 Impact on land due to improper waste disposal during the Operation and
Maintenance Phase 171
Table 7.16 Leaks/Spills during operation phase 173
Table 7.17 Impact to Soil and Land environment during decommissioning phase
activities 174
Table 7.18 Sensitivity Assessment Criteria for Water Resources (Surface water and
Ground water) 175
Table 7.19 Criteria for Impact Magnitude for Assessment of Impact to Surface and
Ground water Resources 176
Table 7.20 Impact on Water Resources during the Construction Phase 179
Table 7.21 Impact on water quality 180
Table 7.22 Impact on water availability during operation phase 181
Table 7.23 Impact on water quality during operation phase 182
Table 7.24 Sensitivity Criteria for Air quality 183
Table 7.25 Criteria for Impact Magnitude for Assessment of Impact to Air Quality
(Construction Phase) 184
Table 7.26 Impact on air quality during construction phase 185
Table 7.27 Impact on air quality during decommissioning phase 186
Table 7.28 Landscape- aesthetic impacts during the Construction Phase 188
Table 7.29 Landscape- aesthetic impacts during the Operation and Maintenance Phase189
Table 7.30 Impact Significance on Occupational Health and Safety: Construction phase
and installation phase 191
Table 7.31 Impact Significance on Occupational Health and Safety: Operation and
Maintenance Phase 192
Table 7.32 Impact Significance on Occupational Health and Safety: Decommissioning
Phase 194
Table 7.33 Assumed construction equipment sound pressure level inventory 195
Table 7.34 Noise generation from construction activities and transportation of man/
material 196
Table 7.35 Predicted Noise Levels at Noise Receptors during Operation Phase of Project
with normal wind conditions. 201
Table 7.36 Noise generation from operation of the WTGs – day time 202
Table 7.37 Noise generation from operation of the WTGs – day time 203
Table 7.38 Identified interactions that are likely to result in significant impacts 204
Table 7.39 Habitat-Impact Assessment Criteria 206
Table 7.40 Species-Impact Assessment Criteria 207
Table 7.41 Impact significance of vegetation clearance during the construction phase 211
Table 7.42 Impact significance of construction activities during the construction phase 214
Table 7.43 Impact significance of approach road laying during construction phase 217
Table 7.44 Impact significance of collision and mortality risk to avifauna and bats from
operating wind turbine blades 220
Table 7.45 Impact significance of collision and electrical hazards from transmission
infrastructure on avifaunal species 222
Table 7.46 Summary of cumulative impacts 223
Table 7.47 Impact Magnitude for Local Communities 225
Table 7.48 Receptor Sensitivity for Local Communities 225
Table 7.49 Impact Significance Matrix 225
Table 7.50 Impact Significance on Community Health and Safety due to Traffic Hazards226
Table 7.51 Shadow Flicker Analysis for Receptors observed to be within 500 m of the
WTGs 234
Table 7.52 Impact Significance of Shadow flickering on sensitive receptors 237
Table 7.53 Significance of impacts of accidents to communities as a result of natural
disasters and blade throw incidents 239
Table.7.54 Significance of impact due to economic loss due to selling of land 241
Table.7.55 Significance of employment opportunity 242
Table 7.56 Significance of Social Development Opportunities 243
Table 8.1 Environmental and social management and monitoring plan for OUWPPL’s
wind Power Project 249
Table 9.1 Impact Assessment Summary 259
List of Figure
Figure 1.1 Map Showing Location of the Project 5
Figure 1.2 Map showing the the location of WTGs in the Project Area 6
Figure 1.3 Approach adopted by ERM for the project 8
Figure 2.1 Map Showing Physical Features of the Project Area 15
Figure 2.2 Land Purchase process for the project 29
Figure 2.3 33/ 220 kV Substation located near the village of Beluguppa 32
Figure 2.4 Evacuation of power from the 220 KV DCOH line from the pooling Sub
Station, eventually termination at the Government Substation, in the village of
Mopidi. 32
Figure 2.5 Storage yard in the village of Gangavaram used for storage of WTG
components. The site office is also located, here. 33
Figure 2.6 Equipment set up in the batching plant for the Project (Location:
Mylarampalle village) 34
Figure 2.7 Type of Roadways present within the Project Area (a) Kuccha Roads
Beluguppa Village (b) Internal Access Roads- Avulenna village (c) State
Highway -82 and (d) Heavy vehicles plying on State Highway -82 35
Figure 2.8 Project Organisational structure: Orange Uravakonda Wind Power Pvt. Ltd 43
Figure 2.9 Organisational structure of Suzlon 44
Figure 5.1 Physical feature map of the Project AoI 66
Figure 5.2 Land use in the Project AoI 70
Figure 5.3 Contour Map of the Project AoI 72
Figure 5.4 Digital Elevation Map of the Project AoI 73
Figure 5.5 Geological and Hydrogeological map of Anantapur District 75
Figure 5.6 Waterbodies observed in the Project AoI at the time of the ERM site visit (a)
Jeedipalli Reservoir (b) Dried up Kanekallu Tank. 76
Figure 5.7 Ahobilam/ PABR Dam located approximately 10 km north east of the Project76
Figure 5.8 Drainage Map of the Project AoI 77
Figure 5.9 Earthquake Hazard Map of the District of Anantapur 81
Figure 5.10 Wind and Cyclone Hazard Map of the District of Anantapur 83
Figure 5.11 Flood Hazard Map of the District of Anantapur 85
Figure 5.12 Map showing the location of ambient air quality (AAQ) stations in the Project
AoI 87
Figure 5.13 PM10 Concentration in the Study Area 89
Figure 5.14 PM2.5 Concentration in the Study Area 89
Figure 5.15 SO2 Concentration in the Study Area 90
Figure 5.16 NOx Concentration in the Study Area 91
Figure 5.17 Map showing the location of Noise quality (NQ) stations in the Project AoI 93
Figure 5.18 Day Time Noise Levels 94
Figure 5.19 Night Time Noise Levels 95
Figure 5.20 Map showing the locations for surface water and ground water locations in
the Project AoI 97
Figure 5.21 Map showing the soil sampling location in the Project AoI 105
Figure 5.22 Map of the Study Area 107
Figure 5.23 Habitat surveyed in the Study Area 110
Figure 5.24 Avifaunal Species observed in the Study Area 112
Figure 5.25 Congregation of aquatic birds in the study area 117
Figure 5.26 Blackbuck observed in the study area 120
Figure 5.27 Map showing estimated migration routes for Anatidae species in the Central
Asian Flyway 121
Figure 5.28 Consultation with one of the affected community in Project study area 123
Figure 5.29 Administrative set up of the study areas 124
Figure 5.30 Literacy profile of the study area villages 128
Figure 5.31 A study centre run by RDT in one of the study area village 131
Figure 5.32 Distribution of main working population in the study area 135
Figure 5.33 Water Supply sources in the study area 140
Figure 5.34 Health facilities in the study area (a) PHC at Beluguppa b) RDT Hospital at
Venkatadiripilli 142
Figure 7.1 Impact Assessment Process 154
Figure 7.2 Impact Significance 156
Figure 7.3 Map showing the 48 WTGs and the Noise Sensitive Receptors in the Project
Area 199
Figure 7.4 Noise map showing 48WTG locations, noise locations and wind speed under
strong wind conditions (8 m/s) 200
Figure 7.5 Schematic representation of collision risk zones to birds and bats 219
Figure 7.6 Map showing WTG and shadow receptor for the Project 232
Figure 7.7 Map showing WTG and shadow receptor for the Project: real case scenario 233
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
1
1 INTRODUCTION
Environmental Resource Management India Pvt. Ltd. (ERM) has been
engaged by Orange Uravakonda Wind Power Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to
as ‘OUWPPL’), a subsidiary of Orange Renewable Power Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter
referred to as ‘Orange’) for undertaking an Environmental and Social Impact
Assessment (ESIA) study for a 100.8 MW wind farm project located near the
village of Belupguppa in the state of Andhra Pradesh. Orange is working with
Suzlon Gujarat Wind Park Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘Suzlon’), an Indian
wind turbine manufacturer. ERM had conducted a site visit to ascertain the
environmental, social and ecological impacts of the project during May 2016.
The Project comprises of 48 wind turbine generators (WTGs) of 2.1 MW
capacities each. The WTGs being utilized for the project are the Suzlon S-111
model. The proposed wind farm is spread primarily around the villages of
Beluguppa, Srirangapuram, Thagguparthi, Yeragudi, Avulenna, Y.
Rengapuram, Duddekunta and Narinjagundlapalli, Nakkalapalli
andSreerangapuram in Beluguppa Mandal of Anantpur District in the state of
Andhra Pradesh.
In the above context, Environment Resources Management (ERM) has been
commissioned by Orange to undertake Environmental and Social Impact
Assessment (ESIA) of the project to meet the requirements of the specified
reference framework in the following section.
1.1 BASIS OF THE REPORT
ERM understands that OUWPPL intends to develop the Project with financial
assistance from its lenders. The Project requires evaluating the environmental
and social risks associated with the proposed project and to implement
mitigation measures in order to avoid potential impacts during the project
lifecycle. It is imperative that the proposed project is in line with the
applicable International Finance Corporation (IFC)/World Bank (WB)
guidelines pertaining to the environment, social issues and occupational
health and safety aspects as well as in compliance with State & National laws
and regulations. The report discusses the environmental and social baseline
within which the proposed wind farm project will be commissioned. In
addition to this, the report will aim to assess the potential adverse and
beneficial impacts that the project could have, along with suitable mitigation
measures followed by an Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP)
for the Project.
1.2 APPLICABLE REFERENCE FRAMEWORK
The applicable reference framework for the ESIA study includes the following
set of standards and guidelines:
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
2
IFC Performance Standards (2012) 1 to 8;
The applicable IFC / World Bank Guidelines: o The General EHS Guidelines,
o EHS Guidelines for Wind Energy, August 2015; o Guidelines for Power Transmission and Distribution, 2007 (for
construction and operation of transmission lines in windfarm); and
o EHS Guidelines for Toll Roads, 2007 (for road infrastructure of wind
farm); and
Applicable local, national and international environmental and social legislation will also be considered as part of the study.
*Note: Wind energy projects in India do not require an Environmental Clearance under the
EIA Notification, 2006. The ESIA is thus being undertaken as an internal management tool.
Thus, ERM is not preparing the ESIA for any regulatory requirements, hence, if any
deliverable if used for the same purpose, ERM needs to be communicated by the Client.
1.3 ORANGE RENEWABLE POWER PVT. LTD.
Orange Renewable Power Pvt. Ltd. is involved in the development of power
projects of over 7,500 MW, with a portfolio ranging from biomass, small hydro
power, wind power and solar power. In India, Orange has been involved in
the operations of wind power projects viz.
39.9 MW Wind Energy Project in Bhesada, Jaisalmer, Rajasthan (fully
commissioned in FY 2013 and is selling 100% of its output to Jodhpur
Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd.under the terms of a 25-year power purchase
agreement);
19.5 MW Wind Energy Project in Dalot, Pratapgarh, Rajasthan (fully
commissioned in FY 2013 and is selling 100% of its output to Jaipur Vidyut
Prasaran Nigam Ltd. under the terms of a 25-year power purchase
agreement);
100.5 MW Wind Energy Project in Mamatkheda, Ratlam and Mandsaur,
Madhya Pradesh (commissioned in April, 2015);
22.5 MW wind power project at Dalot & Devgarh, district, Pratapgarh,
Rajasthan commissioned in FY-2014-15;
100 MW at Nimbagallu, Anantapur (Andhra Pradesh) , commissioned in
FY 2016;
50 MW at Berchha, Ratlam (Madhya Pradesh), commissioned in FY 2016;
34 MW in Khanapur, Sangli, Maharashtra, of which 24 MW has been
commissioned in FY 2015 and 10 MW to be commissioned in FY 17.
1.4 OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT
Orange is in the process of developing a 100.8 MW Project near the village of
Beluguppa. Suzlon has been engaged as the EPC (Engineering, Procurement
and Construction) contractor for the project. They are also responsible for
other project activities such as land procurement, pathway development,
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
3
WTG foundation, DP yards, substation, and transmission lines etc. which are
being performed by contractors that are responsible for executing tasks
pertaining to the project. The salient features of the Project have been
summarized in Table 1.1. The location of the project is presented in Figure 1.1
and the location of the WTGs is presented in Figure 1.2. The contractors that
are responsible for various components related to the Project are listed in
Table 1.2.
Table 1.1 Salient Features of the Project: Snapshot of the Project
Particulars Orange Uravakonda Wind Power Pvt. Ltd., 100.8 MW,
Beluguppa, Andhra Pradesh
Location National Institute of Wind Energy (NIWE) approved site
near Beluguppa village in Andhra Pradesh.
Villages Beluguppa, Srirangapuram, Thagguparthi, Yeragudi,
Avulenna, Y. Rengapuram, Duddekunta and
Narinjagundlapalli
Terrain The site comprises of flat terrain. The ground cover is a mix
of irrigated and unirrigated land.
Type of Wind Turbines Suzlon S111-2.1 MW model wind turbines, 48 no:s
Power evacuation details Pooling Substation (PSS)
Construction of the PSS is under process and is located
near the village of Beluguppa; and
Capacity: 33/220 KV.
Internal Transmission Line and External Transmission Line
Internal Transmission Line: Contsruction of the internal
transmission line is currently ongoing. The total length
of the 33 kV line is approximately 25.0 km and will be of
Rolled Steel Joist (RSJ) type. The Internal access line will
evacuate power via a network of 4 feeders at the PSS
(viz.#2, 4, 5 and 6); and
External Transmission Line: Construction of the 220 kV
line is currently ongoing. The total length of the external
transmission line is approximately 22.2 km and will
comprise of lattice type towers and in the final stages of
construction. Power will be evacuated to the 400/220 kV
APTRANSCO government sub station whichis situated
in the village of Mopidi.
Project Status at time of ESIA
study
WTG foundation casting activities: ongoing;
Purchase of Land/ Right of Way (RoW) clearance
process: ongoing.
Project Commissioning date FY 2017
Source: OUWPPL
Table 1.2 Contractors associated with Suzlon for the Project
SN. Contractor’s Name Scope of Work
1 M/s Top View Pvt Ltd. Land aggregator and Batching Plant
2 M/s Sai Ram Land
Developers Pvt. Ltd.
Land aggregator
3 M/s Aspen Pvt. Ltd. Construction of PSS
4 M/s KSA Electrical work at the PSS
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
4
SN. Contractor’s Name Scope of Work
4 M/s Harsha Engineering Pvt.
Ltd.
Construction of 33 kV Internal Transmission Line
5 Suzlon Gujarat Wind Park
Ltd.
Road construction, particularly internal access roads
linking project components and WTGs with one
another
6 M/s Top View Pvt Ltd. WTG Foundation Casting
7 M/s Chaitanya Pvt. Ltd. WTG Foundation Casting
Source: OUWPPL
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
5
Figure 1.1 Map Showing Location of the Project
Source: Maps of India
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
6
Figure 1.2 Map showing the the location of WTGs in the Project Area
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
7
1.5 PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
OUWPPL is undertaking this ESIA as part of lender requirements against the
specified reference framework (1) relating to the environment, social issues
and occupational health and safety matters, in addition to complying with
Indian laws and regulations. The report discusses the environmental and
social baseline within which the proposed wind farm project will be
commissioned and assesses the potential adverse and beneficial impacts that
the project could have, along with suitable mitigation measures and an
Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) for the Project.
1.6 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The ESIA study has been undertaken with the following objectives:
To facilitate an understanding of the elements of the existing baseline
conditions prevailing in the study area (5 km zone from project
boundary is considered as study area);
To identify the aspects of the Project likely to result in significant
impacts to resources/receptors;
To predict and evaluate the significance of the impacts of the Project;
To document the stakeholder consultation during the study;
To determine the significance of residual impacts, taking into account
the implementation of mitigation measures; and
To develop plans for the management and monitoring of impacts,
including plans for ongoing stakeholder engagement.
1.7 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
In order to meet the objectives as specified in Section 1.6 , the scope of Work
for the ESIA broadly entails:
Identification and review of the applicable local, state, national and
international environmental legislation and regulatory framework;
Primary Baseline data collection through field surveys and monitoring
with respect to ambient air quality, Noise quality, ground water quality,
surface water quality and soil quality within the study area;
Collection of baseline information through secondary documents with
respect to meteorology, soil quality, land use pattern, geology,
geomorphology, hydrology, ecology and socio economic profile within
the study area of 5km radius of the project site;
(1) The specified framework consists of: IFC Performance Standards, Indian environmental and social regulations and the
Applicable Sectoral EHS Guidelines;
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
8
Identification of any instances of shadow flicker that would potentially
effect human settlements in the vicinity Project, and if identified, to
develop mitigation measures to reduce the effects;
Ascertain whether Project or its immediate environment is considered to
be of value regarding specially protected species birds and bats;
Prediction and identification of environmental impacts of the project
followed by evaluation of significance of the predicted impacts;
Suggesting appropriate mitigation/ enhancement measures for
identified environmental and social impacts;
Comparison and analysis of the alternatives considered for the project
with respect to location and power generation technology; and
Formulation of Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) in
accordance with IFC’s Performance Standard 1 addressing the various
aspects considered in IFC’s Performance Standards 2 through 8 with
management tools and techniques including monitoring and reporting
requirements for effective implementation.
1.8 APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY
ERM’s approach and methodology (Figure 1.3) for Project Dossier is
summarized below:
Figure 1.3 Approach adopted by ERM for the project
Source: The ERM Impact Assessment Standard. v1
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
9
1.8.1 Preliminary Discussions with Project Proponent
Discussions were held with OUWPPL and Suzlon personnel to understand
the Project, current status of agreements (i.e. land allocation, power
purchase agreement, electricity generation license, etc.), Project milestones,
legal requirements and scope of ESIA; and
Collation of relevant project documents such as WTG micro-siting, wind
assessment report, organization charts, land purchase process, health and
safety plan, company’s HR policies, , transportation routes, transmission
routes, etc.
1.8.2 Scoping Study
The main objective of the scoping was to ascertain the environmental issues
associated with the Project on which ESIA study will be focussed. For this
purpose, the project documents were reviewed and site survey was
undertaken to understand the environmental and social sensitivities
prevailing in the project area. Based on this, likely environmental issues
associated with the Project activities were ascertained through matrices during
construction, operation and decommissioning phases.
1.8.3 Document Review
Desk based review of the relevant documents and available imagery of the
project site and its surroundings was carried out to have a clear understanding
of the Project and to assess environmental and social sensitivities around the
Project. The desk-based review focused on the following key information
about the Project and the facilities under the purview of the Project:
Detailed Project Report prepared by OUWPPL;
Technical Due Diligence Proposed wind farm layout and micro-siting map;
Topographical maps of Survey of India;
Permission letter of Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh
(APTRANSCO) for grid connectivity to the project;
Approval latter from New and Renewable Energy Development
Corporation of Andhra Pradesh ( NREDCAP); and
Organizational Chart and Human Resources Policies.
1.8.4 Site Survey and Preliminary Consultations
ERM team has undertaken a site reconnaissance survey and limited
stakeholder consultation in the project area. During the visit, following was
identified:
Key social and environmental risks/receptors in the Project influence area;
Human resource and labour issues, inclusive of potential occupational
health and safety;
Issues of environmental pollution and resource usage;
Prevailing community engagement processes;
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
10
Aspects of community health and safety, if any, linked to the proposed
operations;
Significance of impacts on biodiversity and natural resource management;
and
Discussions with the local communities in the vicinity to understand their
views of the project.
1.8.5 Environmental Baseline Data Collection
Environmental baseline data was collected through primary monitoring and
surveys of the study area (5 km distance from project area). Secondary
information through literature surveys was also collected for the study area.
The baseline study included the following:
Primary environmental baseline data collection within study area between
the 3rd of May and the 7th of May, 2016. The primary environmental
baseline data was collected with respect to ambient air quality, water
(surface and groundwater) quality, soil quality, ambient noise quality,
ecology and socio-economics;
The GIS mapping of the study area was done to present details on land use
pattern, forest/ vegetation cover, settlements, water bodies, drainage
pattern, spot heights and contours; and
Reconnaissance surveys of the project site and surrounding area within 5
km distance around the project site (defined as study area) to ascertain
prevailing features of the biophysical and social environments;
Information on geology, meteorological conditions, water and ecological
resources, socio-economic status etc. was also collected from secondary
sources.
1.8.6 Stakeholder Consultation
During site visit for ESIA, following groups of stakeholders were consulted
with the objective of collecting baseline data/information and to understand
specific issues;
OUWPPL and Suzlon Representatives;
Land Sellers;
Land Aggregators;
Contract workers;
Contractor Representatives of M/s KSA and M/s Top View;
Panchayat President of Beluguppa;
Panchayat Secretary of Narasapuram Panchayat;
Senior Doctor at Beluguppa Primary Health Centre;
Education Officer, Rural Development Trust;
Members of local women self-help groups; and
Local Community.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
11
1.8.7 Impact Assessment
Assessment of potential impacts on the various environmental and social
elements due to the Project activities was carried out for this ESIA study. The
likely impacts on loss of land, land-based and non-land based livelihoods,
vulnerable groups (women, youth etc.), labour, water environment, air
environment (including traffic volume count), biological environment and
socio-economic environment has been identified based on the actual and
foreseeable events/Project activities. For the impact assessment, wherever
necessary, professional judgement, experience and knowledge on similar
projects have been used. The extent and potential consequences of the impacts
have been compared against applicable standards and guidelines. Mitigation
measures have been suggested for each of the identified adverse impacts.
1.8.8 Environmental and Social Management Plan
The Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) has been developed
to include the following:
Introduction of purpose and aims of the ESMP;
Summary of significant adverse impacts and potential risks;
Mitigations and control technologies, safeguards etc. to minimize adverse
impacts on air, water, soil, ecological and socioeconomic environment;
Occupational health related mitigation measures including occupational
health surveillance programme;
Institutional mechanism - roles and responsibilities for ESMP
implementation, training of ESMP implementation team;
Action Plans for effective control measures to minimize adverse
impacts/risks; and
Monitoring program for effective implementation of the mitigations and
ascertain efficacy of the environmental management and risk control
systems in place;
1.9 LIMITATIONS
This ESIA report is based on scientific principles and professional judgment
applied to facts with resultant subjective interpretations. Professional
judgments expressed herein are based on the analysis of available data and
information. The ESIA report was prepared with the following limitations:
At the time of the site visit, the WTG profiling of 21 sites was performed as
land parcels for the remaining sites were at various stages of negotiation
and purchase. The remainder of the sites were assessed after finalisation
by the client with the help of the latest satellite imagery data; and
The stakeholder consultation was done with the land owners who had
willingly sold their land, hence may not be representative of all concerned
stakeholders.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
12
1.9.1 Uses of the Report
ERM is not engaged in consulting or reporting for the purpose of advertising,
sales promotion, or endorsement of any client interests, including raising
investment capital, recommending investment decisions, or other publicity
purposes. The client acknowledges this report has been prepared for their and
their clients’ exclusive use and agrees that ERM reports or correspondence
will not be used or reproduced in full or in part for such purposes, and may
not be used or relied upon in any prospectus or offering circular. The client
also agrees that none of its advertising, sales promotion, or other publicity
matter containing information obtained from this assessment and report will
mention or imply the name of ERM.
Nothing contained in this report shall be construed as a warranty or
affirmation by ERM that the site and property described in the report are
suitable collateral for any loan or that acquisition of such property by any
lender through foreclosure proceedings or otherwise will not expose the
lender to potential environmental or social liability.
Table 1.3 Structure of the report
Section Title Description
Section 1 Introduction (this section) Introduction to the Project and ESIA
methodology
Section 2 Project Description Technical description of the Project & related
infrastructure and activities
Section 3 Administrative
Framework
Discussion of the applicable environmental and
social regulatory framework and its relevance for
the Project.
Section 4 Screening and Scoping Description of the outcomes of the Screening
exercise and description of the outcome of the
Scoping exercise undertaken as part of the ESIA
process.
Section 5 Environmental, Ecological
and Social Baseline
An outline of the Environmental, Ecological and
Social Baseline status in the area of the Project.
Section 6 Stakeholder Mapping and
Identiciation
An outline of the engagement with the stakeholder
groups undertaken as part of the assessment process
and the key issues identified from the same.
Section 7 Impact Assessment This section includes details of identified
environmental impacts and associated risks due to
project activities, assessment of significance of
impacts and presents mitigation measures for
minimizing and /or offsetting adverse impacts
identified.
Section 8 Environmental and Social
Management Plan
Outline of the Environmental and Social
Management Plan (ESMP) taking into account
identified impacts and planned mitigation measures
and monitoring requirements.
Section 9 Impact Summary and
Conclusion
Summary of impacts identified for the Project
The Annexes are as follows (Table 1.4):
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
13
Table 1.4 Annexes in the report
Annex No. Title
A Photo documentation
B Policies of Orange
C Applicable Environmental Standards
D Environmental Monitoring Results: Ambient Air Quality
E Environmental Monitoring Results: Noise Quality
F Environmental Monitoring Results: Surface Water Quality
G Environmental Monitoring Results: Ground Water Quality
H Environmental Monitoring Results: Soil Quality
I Project Shadow Flicker Assessment Data Overview
J Project Shadow Calendar Graphical
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
14
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This section provides a detailed description of the Project location, its key
components, current status, Project permitting requirements and
organizational management systems.
2.1 PROJECT SETTING
2.1.1 Project location and Setting
As mentioned in Chapter 1, the wind farm project is spread across the villages
of Beluguppa, Srirangapuram, Thagguparthi, Yeragudi, Avulenna, Y.
Rengapuram, Duddekunta and Narinjagundlapalli, Nakkalapalli and
Sreerangapuram in Beluguppa Mandal of Anantpur District in the state of
Andhra Pradesh. The Project is located between Easting coordinates of
723078.00 m E and 737563.00 m E and Northing coordinates of 1628880.00 m N
and 1625983.00 m N, respectively and is approximately 40 km south of the
town of Bellary (also known as Ballari), in Karnataka. The city of Anantapur
(Andhra Pradesh) lies approximately 45 km East of the Project. Road access
for both clusters is via State Highway 82 (also known as SH-82 or Bellary-
Anantapur Road) which bisects the Project area in a west to east direction and
is a primary means of access and material movement. The State Highway 82,
in turn connects to State Highway 32 and eventually to National Highway 67,
which starts at the junction of NH 48 near Hubli of Karnataka and ends at
Krishnapatnam Port road in Andhra Pradesh (1) (2) . In addition to this, the
Project area is also accessible by a network of internal village roads
(bituminous and non-bituminous) that originate from State Highway 82. No
national park, wildlife sanctuaries, biosphere reserves, notified historical and
cultural sites etc. have been observed to be located within 5 km radius from
the Project site. The physical features map of Project and its study area is
shown in Figure 2.1. The photo documentation of each of the WTGs direction-
wise is provided in Annex A.
(1) NH-63 (previously National Highway 67) passes through Ramnagar, Huballi, Ballary, Gooty, Tadapatri, Muddanru,
Maidukuru, Nellore, Krishnapatnam port Road. (2) Roads and Buildings Department (Government of Andhra Pradesh).
http://aproads.cgg.gov.in/getInfo.do?dt=1&oId=33. Accessed on 25/06/2016.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
15
Figure 2.1 Map Showing Physical Features of the Project Area
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
16
Table 2.1 WTG Profiling of the 100.8 MW Project (up to a distance of 500 m from the WTG)
S
N
.
WT
G
ID
WTG Co-ordinates
(in UTM)
WTG
Site
Elevatio
n (m)
WTG Footprint Area Nearest house/ structure Nearest Village Nearest Waterbody Nearest
Cultural/
Religious Site
Approach/ Access Road
Condition
Distanc
e from
the
nearest
Paved
Road
(km)
Land use around WTG
Location
Easting
(m)
Northing
(m)
Topograp
hy
(undulatin
g land/flat
land/on
plateau or
hill ridge)
Landuse
(Based on
Land
Records* )
Identificati
on (Name/
ID in Map)
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n
Use of
Structure
(residentia
l/
agricultur
e/ storage)
Name
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n from
WTG
Identificati
on ID
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n from
WTG
Are
there
religiou
s sites?
Are
there
religiou
s sites?
Is
there
moto
r
able
acces
s to
site?
Conditio
n of
Road
and
Type
Distanc
e from
the
nearest
Approac
h Point
(km)
Nort
h
Eas
t
Wes
t
Sout
h
1 BLG
-123
735742.0
0 m E
1626712.
00 m N 495 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG
Thagguparty
Approx.
2.1 km
N
No Yes Church
Approx
. 2.4 km
N
Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.090
km S
Approx
. 0.874
km km
N
Private Agricultural
land
2 BLG
-124
736052.0
0 m E
1626397.
00 m N 495 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Thagguparty
Approx.
2.4 km
N
No Yes Church
Approx
. 2.6 km
N
Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.090
km S
Approx
. 0.91
km km
N
Private Agricultural
land
3 BLG
-125
736336.0
0 m E
1625936.
00 m N 493 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Thagguparty
Approx.
2.8 km
N
No Yes Church
Approx
. 3.1km
N
Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.12 km
S
Approx
. 0.99
km km
N
Private Agricultural
land
4 BLG
-077
731816.0
0 m E
1628201.
00 m N 485 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Belaguppa
Approx.
1.62 km
W
No NA
2
temple
s
Approx
. 1.65
km W
Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.14 km
N
Approx
. 0.14
km N
Private Agricultural
land
5 BLG
-078
731900.0
0 m E
1627827.
00 m N 483m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Belaguppa
Approx.
1.77 km
W
No NA
2
temple
s
Approx
. 1.82
km W
Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.54 km
N
Approx
. 0.54
km N
Private Agricultural
land
6 BLG
-075
731375.0
0 m E
1629040.
00 m N 486 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG, except for proposed
pooling substation, which is located within
500 m, southwards.
Belaguppa
Approx.
1.65 km
SSW
No NA
2
temple
s
Approx
. 1.65
km
SSW
Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.75 km
S
Approx
. 0.75
km S
Private Agricultural
land
7 BLG
-025
727976.0
0 m E
1627668.
00 m N 491 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Belaguppa
Approx.
1.72 km
E
No NA
2
temple
s
Approx
. 1.76
km E
Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.13 km
N
Approx
. 0.13
km N
Private Agricultural
land
8 BLG
-017
726612.0
0 m E
1627617.
00 m N 491 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Belaguppa
Approx.
3.0 km
E
No NA
2
temple
s
Approx
. 3.2 km
E
Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.15 km
S
Approx
. 0.15
km S
Private Agricultural
land
9 BLG
-018
726736.0
0 m E
1627032.
00 m N 490 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG
Belaguppa
Tanda
Approx.
1.8 km
E
No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.45 km
S
Approx
. 0.45
km S
Private Agricultural
land
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
17
S
N
.
WT
G
ID
WTG Co-ordinates
(in UTM)
WTG
Site
Elevatio
n (m)
WTG Footprint Area Nearest house/ structure Nearest Village Nearest Waterbody Nearest
Cultural/
Religious Site
Approach/ Access Road
Condition
Distanc
e from
the
nearest
Paved
Road
(km)
Land use around WTG
Location
Easting
(m)
Northing
(m)
Topograp
hy
(undulatin
g land/flat
land/on
plateau or
hill ridge)
Landuse
(Based on
Land
Records* )
Identificati
on (Name/
ID in Map)
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n
Use of
Structure
(residentia
l/
agricultur
e/ storage)
Name
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n from
WTG
Identificati
on ID
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n from
WTG
Are
there
religiou
s sites?
Are
there
religiou
s sites?
Is
there
moto
r
able
acces
s to
site?
Conditio
n of
Road
and
Type
Distanc
e from
the
nearest
Approac
h Point
(km)
Nort
h
Eas
t
Wes
t
Sout
h
1
0
BLG
-007
724235.0
0 m E
1626859.
00 m N 489 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG
Narinjagundlapa
lle
Approx.
2.9 km
W
No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.20 km
S
Approx
. 0.20
km S
Private Agricultural
land
1
1
BLG
-016
726124.0
0 m E
1627974.
00 m N 481 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Nakkalapalli
Approx.
0.90 km
N
No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.065
km W
Approx
. 0.065
km W
Private Agricultural
land
1
2
BLG
-015
725966.0
0 m E
1628436.
00 m N 481 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Primarily Pucca structures observed to be
within 500 m radius Nakkalapalli
Approx.
0.43 km
N
No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.132
km W
Approx
. 0.132
km W
Private Agricultural
land
1
3
BLG
-028
727472.0
0 m E
1629035.
00 m N 491 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Nakkalapalli
Approx.
1.02 km
W
No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.21 km
S
Approx
. 0.21
km S
Private Agricultural
land
1
4
BLG
-085
731541.0
0 m E
1624148.
00 m N 498 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Avulena
Approx.
0.59 km
W
No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.30 km
S
Approx
. 0.30
km S
Private Agricultural
land
1
5
BLG
-084
732151.0
0 m E
1624801.
00 m N 494 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Avulena
Approx.
1.34 km
W
No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.25 km
W
Approx
. 0.25
km W
Private Agricultural
land
1
6
BLG
-082
731369.0
0 m E
1625525.
00 m N 496 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Avulena
Approx.
1.83 km No NA
Yes,
temple
Approx
/ 1.9
km S
Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.21 km
W
Approx
. 0.21
km W
Private Agricultural
land
1
7
BLG
-157
737381.0
0 m E
1629014.
00 m N 491 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Primarily Pucca structures observed to be
within 500 m radius (overlapping with BLG-
158)
Tagguparthy
Approx.
0.28 km
SSW
No NA Yes,
church
Approx
. 0.26
km
SSW
Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.23 km
W
Approx
. 0.23
km W
Private Agricultural
land
1
8
BLG
-156
737446.0
0 m E
1629375.
00 m N 490 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Tagguparthy
Approx.
0.28 km
SSW
No NA Yes,
church
Approx
. 0.26
km
SSW
Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.23 km
W
Approx
. 0.23
km W
Private Agricultural
land
1
9
BLG
-154
737491.0
0 m E
1630225.
00 m N 490 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Tagguparthy
Approx.
1.45 km
SSW
No NA Yes,
church
Approx
. 1.46
km
SSW
Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.2 km E
Approx
. 1.45
km S
Private Agricultural
land
2
0
BLG
-027
727359.0
0 m E
1628568.
00 m N 488 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Nakkalapalli
Approx.
1.0 km
NNW
No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.28 km
N
Approx
. 0.28
km N
Private Agricultural
land
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
18
S
N
.
WT
G
ID
WTG Co-ordinates
(in UTM)
WTG
Site
Elevatio
n (m)
WTG Footprint Area Nearest house/ structure Nearest Village Nearest Waterbody Nearest
Cultural/
Religious Site
Approach/ Access Road
Condition
Distanc
e from
the
nearest
Paved
Road
(km)
Land use around WTG
Location
Easting
(m)
Northing
(m)
Topograp
hy
(undulatin
g land/flat
land/on
plateau or
hill ridge)
Landuse
(Based on
Land
Records* )
Identificati
on (Name/
ID in Map)
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n
Use of
Structure
(residentia
l/
agricultur
e/ storage)
Name
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n from
WTG
Identificati
on ID
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n from
WTG
Are
there
religiou
s sites?
Are
there
religiou
s sites?
Is
there
moto
r
able
acces
s to
site?
Conditio
n of
Road
and
Type
Distanc
e from
the
nearest
Approac
h Point
(km)
Nort
h
Eas
t
Wes
t
Sout
h
2
1
BLG
-026
727542.0
0 m E
1628115.
00 m N 485 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Nakkalapalli
Approx.
1.4 km
NNW
No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.41 km
S
Approx
. 0.41
km S
Private Agricultural
land
2
2
BLG
-008
724425.0
0 m E
1627329.
00 m N 486 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Nakkalapalli
Approx.
2.3 km
NNE
No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.018
km S
Approx
. 0.19
km S
Private Agricultural
land
2
3
BLG
-009
724157.0
0 m E
1627761.
00 m N 490 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Nakkalapalli
Approx.
2.3 km
NNE
No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.017
km S
Approx
. 0.62
km S
Private Agricultural
land
2
4
BLG
-010
723818.0
0 m E
1628120.
00 m N 490 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG
Narinjagundlapa
lle
Approx.
0.7 km
S
No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.042
km N
Approx
. 0.1 km
S
Private Agricultural
land
2
5
BLG
-011
723366.0
0 m E
1628655.
00 m N 490 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Sreerangapuram
Approx.
1.8 km
N
No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.39 km
S
Approx
. 0.74
km W
Private Agricultural
land
2
6
BLG
-012
723078.0
0 m E
1628880.
00 m N 491 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Sreerangapuram
Approx.
1.6 km
N
No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.065
km N
Approx
. 0.40
km W
Private Agricultural
land
2
7
BLG
-013
723227.0
0 m E
1629369.
00 m N 490 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
BLG-013-H1
BLG-013-H2
0.29 km
NNW
0.40 km
NNW
NA
NA
Residenti
al
structure
Residenti
al
structure
and used
for
storage of
agricultur
al
produce.
Sreerangapuram
Approx.
1.1 km
N
No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.07 km
N
Approx
. 0.40
km W
Private Agricultural
land
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
19
S
N
.
WT
G
ID
WTG Co-ordinates
(in UTM)
WTG
Site
Elevatio
n (m)
WTG Footprint Area Nearest house/ structure Nearest Village Nearest Waterbody Nearest
Cultural/
Religious Site
Approach/ Access Road
Condition
Distanc
e from
the
nearest
Paved
Road
(km)
Land use around WTG
Location
Easting
(m)
Northing
(m)
Topograp
hy
(undulatin
g land/flat
land/on
plateau or
hill ridge)
Landuse
(Based on
Land
Records* )
Identificati
on (Name/
ID in Map)
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n
Use of
Structure
(residentia
l/
agricultur
e/ storage)
Name
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n from
WTG
Identificati
on ID
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n from
WTG
Are
there
religiou
s sites?
Are
there
religiou
s sites?
Is
there
moto
r
able
acces
s to
site?
Conditio
n of
Road
and
Type
Distanc
e from
the
nearest
Approac
h Point
(km)
Nort
h
Eas
t
Wes
t
Sout
h
2
8
BLG
-014
723151.0
0 m E
1629821.
00 m N 491 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
BLG-014-H1 0.47 km N
NA
Residenti
al
structure
and used
for
storage of
agricultur
al
produce.
Sreerangapuram
Approx.
1.1 km
N
No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.14 km
S
Approx
. 0.17
km W
Private Agricultural
land
2
9
BLG
-024
728225.0
0 m E
1627147.
00 m N 491 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Primarily Pucca structures observed to be within 500 m radius
Beluguppa 0.31 km
SSE No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.80 km
W
Approx
. 0.24
km S
Private Agricultural
land
3
0
BLG
-076
726967.0
0 m E
1629378.
00 m N 492 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
BLG-076-H1
BLG-076 H2
BLG-076-H3
0.44 km
SSW
0.49 km
SSW
0.46 km
SSW
NA
Residenti
al
structure
and used
for
storage of
agricultur
al
produce.
Nakalapalli 0.44 km
SSW No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.43 km
S
Approx
. 0.43
km S
Private Agricultural
land
3
1
BLG
-079
731311.0
0 m E
1627167.
00 m N 488 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Beluguppa
1.3 km
NNW No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.11km
NNW
Approx
. 1.12
km N
Private Agricultural
land
3
2
BLG
-080
730875.0
0 m E
1626724.
00 m N 488 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
2 Warehouses observed to be within 500 m
radius Beluguppa
1.03 km
NNW No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Pucca
Type
Approx.
0.26 km
S
Approx
. 0.26
km S
Private Agricultural
land
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
20
S
N
.
WT
G
ID
WTG Co-ordinates
(in UTM)
WTG
Site
Elevatio
n (m)
WTG Footprint Area Nearest house/ structure Nearest Village Nearest Waterbody Nearest
Cultural/
Religious Site
Approach/ Access Road
Condition
Distanc
e from
the
nearest
Paved
Road
(km)
Land use around WTG
Location
Easting
(m)
Northing
(m)
Topograp
hy
(undulatin
g land/flat
land/on
plateau or
hill ridge)
Landuse
(Based on
Land
Records* )
Identificati
on (Name/
ID in Map)
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n
Use of
Structure
(residentia
l/
agricultur
e/ storage)
Name
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n from
WTG
Identificati
on ID
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n from
WTG
Are
there
religiou
s sites?
Are
there
religiou
s sites?
Is
there
moto
r
able
acces
s to
site?
Conditio
n of
Road
and
Type
Distanc
e from
the
nearest
Approac
h Point
(km)
Nort
h
Eas
t
Wes
t
Sout
h
3
3
BLG
-081
731317.0
0 m E
1626022.
00 m N 488 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Beluguppa
1.86 km
NNW No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Pucca
Type
Approx.
0.98 km
W
Approx
. 0.98
km W
Private Agricultural
land
3
4
BLG
-083
731263.0
0 m E
1624968.
00 m N 488 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Beluguppa
1.76 km
NNE No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.47 km
E
Approx
. 0.47
km E
Private Agricultural
land
3
5
BLG
-086
734097.0
0 m E
1625966.
00 m N 489 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Yerragudi
0.95 km
W No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.36 km
W
Approx
. 036
km W
Private Agricultural
land
3
6
BLG
-087
733847.0
0 m E
1626377.
00 m N 491 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Yerragudi
0.74 km
W No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.54 km
S
Approx
. 0.54
km S
Private Agricultural
land
3
7
BLG
-088
733666.0
0 m E
1627040.
00 m N 490 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG
Yerragudi 0.87 km
SSW No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Kuccha
Type
Approx.
0.064
km S
Approx
. 1.1 km
S
Private Agricultural
land
3
8
BLG
-089
733379.0
0 m E
1627474.
00 m N 490 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG
Yerragudi 1.27 km
SSW No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Pucca
Type
Approx.
1.07 km
N
Approx
. 1.07
km N
Private Agricultural
land
3
9
BLG
-090
733382.0
0 m E
1627933.
00 m N 489 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG
Yerragudi 1.55 km
SSW No NA No NA Yes
Village
Road-
Pucca
Type
Approx.
0.64 km
N
Approx
. 0.64
km N
Private Agricultural
land
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
21
S
N
.
WT
G
ID
WTG Co-ordinates
(in UTM)
WTG
Site
Elevatio
n (m)
WTG Footprint Area Nearest house/ structure Nearest Village Nearest Waterbody Nearest
Cultural/
Religious Site
Approach/ Access Road
Condition
Distanc
e from
the
nearest
Paved
Road
(km)
Land use around WTG
Location
Easting
(m)
Northing
(m)
Topograp
hy
(undulatin
g land/flat
land/on
plateau or
hill ridge)
Landuse
(Based on
Land
Records* )
Identificati
on (Name/
ID in Map)
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n
Use of
Structure
(residentia
l/
agricultur
e/ storage)
Name
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n from
WTG
Identificati
on ID
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n from
WTG
Are
there
religiou
s sites?
Are
there
religiou
s sites?
Is
there
moto
r
able
acces
s to
site?
Conditio
n of
Road
and
Type
Distanc
e from
the
nearest
Approac
h Point
(km)
Nort
h
Eas
t
Wes
t
Sout
h
4
0
BLG
-152
737582.0
0 m E
1631468.
00 m N 486 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Tagguparthy
2.3 km
SSW No NA No NA Yes
No
access
Approx.
2.3 km
SSW
Approx
. 2.7 km
S
Private Agricultural
land
4
1
BLG
-153
737555.0
0 m E
1630743.
00 m N 486m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Tagguparthy
1.8 km
SSW No NA No NA Yes
No
access
Approx.
1.8 km
SSW
Approx
. 1.97
km S
Private Agricultural
land
4
2
BLG
-155
737569.0
0 m E
1629824.
00 m N 486m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Tagguparthy
1.15 km
SSW No NA No NA Yes
No
access
Approx.
0.57 km
S
Approx
. 1.08
km S
Private Agricultural
land
4
3
BLG
-158
737223.0
0 m E
1628529.
00 m N 487 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Village of Tagguparthy falling within 500 m of
WTG Tagguparthy
0.205
km N No NA No NA Yes
No
access
Approx.
0.27 km
N
Approx
. 0.27
km N
Private Agricultural
land
4
4
BLG
-159
737084.0
0 m E
1628064.
00 m N 488 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Tagguparthy
0.63 km
N No NA No NA Yes
No
access
Approx.
0.07 km
N
Approx
. 0.76
km N
Private Agricultural
land
4
5
BLG
-160
737217.0
0 m E
1627595.
00 m N 488 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Tagguparthy
0.63 km
N No NA No NA Yes
No
access
Approx.
0.07 km
N
Approx
. 0.76
km N
Private Agricultural
land
4
6
BLG
-161
737660.0
0 m E
1626908.
00 m N 489 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Tagguparthy
2.0 km
N No NA No NA Yes
No
access
Approx.
1.7 km
N
Approx
. 1.7 km
N
Private Agricultural
land
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
22
S
N
.
WT
G
ID
WTG Co-ordinates
(in UTM)
WTG
Site
Elevatio
n (m)
WTG Footprint Area Nearest house/ structure Nearest Village Nearest Waterbody Nearest
Cultural/
Religious Site
Approach/ Access Road
Condition
Distanc
e from
the
nearest
Paved
Road
(km)
Land use around WTG
Location
Easting
(m)
Northing
(m)
Topograp
hy
(undulatin
g land/flat
land/on
plateau or
hill ridge)
Landuse
(Based on
Land
Records* )
Identificati
on (Name/
ID in Map)
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n
Use of
Structure
(residentia
l/
agricultur
e/ storage)
Name
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n from
WTG
Identificati
on ID
Distanc
e (km)
and
Directio
n from
WTG
Are
there
religiou
s sites?
Are
there
religiou
s sites?
Is
there
moto
r
able
acces
s to
site?
Conditio
n of
Road
and
Type
Distanc
e from
the
nearest
Approac
h Point
(km)
Nort
h
Eas
t
Wes
t
Sout
h
4
7
BLG
-162
737660.0
0 m E
1626908.
00 m N 489 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Tagguparthy
2.3 km
N No NA No NA Yes
No
access
Approx.
2.3 km
N
Approx
. 2.3 km
N
Private Agricultural
land
4
8
BLG
-163
737660.0
0 m E
1626908.
00 m N 489 m Flat
Private
Agricultur
al land
Structures were not observed in the vicinity of
the proposed WTG Tagguparthy
2.7 km
N No NA No NA Yes
No
access
Approx.
2.7 km
N
Approx
. 2.7 km
N
Private Agricultural
land
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
2.2 LAND REQUIREMENTS
Land for a typical wind power project is required for the following
components:
Wind Turbine Generators;
Internal and approach Roads;
Right of way (RoW) for internal transmission line extending upto PSS;
Pooling sub-station;
Batching plant; and
Stockyard.
The details of land requirement for the various components and the present
status of the land procurement and the process followed for the same is
captured below.
2.3 LAND DETAILS
The total land requirement for each of the project component, type of land,
village from which land is procured, and the status of the land procurement is
captured in Table 2.2.
The developer i.e. Suzlon, is directly responsible for negotiating and
purchasing the identified land parcels from the local farmers.
Suzlon has a land team working in Anantpur area and comprises of 6 – 7
members.
There are two Suzlon personnel handling land matters for this project, one
from the land team and the other from the legal.
Suzlon has two land facilitators, M/s Top View and M/s Sairam Land
Developers for the project.
The land purchase process for the project started around November 2015
and purchase of all the locations have been completed by the end of June
2016.
Suzlon is purchasing the land for the project and then transferring it to
OUWPPL. At the time of ERM site visit, purchase for 34 locations was
completed of the 48 locations and among them 6 locations were
transferred in the name of OUWPPL.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
Table 2.2 Summary of the land required for the Project
S
N.
Project
Component
Land Area (in
acre)
Type of
Land
Village Status of procurement
1. Wind Turbine
Generators (48
Nos)
Approx. 3.5-5
acres per
WTG
including the
land for
approach
roads per
WTG
Private
Agricultural
8 villages in
Beluguppa
mandals
Purchase of land for 34
locations was completed at
the time of site visit and the
remaining has been
completed by end of June
2016.
2. Pooling Sub
Station (1)
28 acres Private
Agricultural
Beluguppa Land has been purchased
from 6 landsellers and sale
deed has been executed in
the name of Suzlon
3. Transmission
Line (31km)
Information
not available
Private
Agricultural
Transmission lines to be
erected parallel to the
access roads and therefore
no additional land for
transmission lines were
foreseen.
4. Labour Camps NA Suzlon did not have labor
camps for the project as
most of the labourers were
sourced locally. 5. Operational &
Maintenance
facility area
20 acres Private land Gangavaram
village The land is on lease from 2-
3 land owners
6. Batching Plants 10 acres Mylarampalle
village The project utilises the
batching plant set up by
M/s Top View. Source: ERM Site Visit May 2016, Beluguppa; NA: Not Applicable
2.3.1 Project related land procurement and specific issues
On the basis of the information available presently, some of the observations
especially with respect to the project related land procurement are mentioned
below.
Schedule V Area1
The project area does not fall under Schedule V area as defined in the Indian
constitution.
1.In the Constitution of India, the expression “Scheduled Areas” means such areas as the President may by order declare to
be Scheduled Areas. The criteria followed for declaring an area as Scheduled Area are preponderance of tribal population;
compactness and reasonable size of the area; under-developed nature of the area; and marked disparity in economic
standard of the people. These criteria are not spelt out in the Constitution of India but have become well established.
(Source: Official website of the Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA), Government of India (GoI). url:
http://tribal.nic.in/Content/DefinitionofScheduledAreasProfiles.aspx. Accessed on 15.07.2015).
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
Forest land
The WTG locations are being developed only on private agricultural or
unirrigated single crop lands. Therefore, there is no risk to forest ecology, and
no issues related to individual claims or community claims over the forest
land.
Tribal (Scheduled Tribe) land1
The land mostly belongs to caste Hindus such as Reddy, Kamma, and Balijas,.
The land sellers are medium and semi-medium farmers2.
The study area does not fall under the Schedule V area. As observed in Table
5.25, there were few ST families in the study area and during the consultations
it was observed that the ST households in the area have patta lands and have
built houses on their land. No land has been purchased from the ST
population in the area and therefore their livelihoods have not been directly
affected by land purchase for the project.
Landlessness
As reported by Suzlon land team, none of the land sellers will be rendered
landless or economically vulnerable after the sale. The land sellers with whom
ERM undertook consultations confirmed the same.
Most of the land owners in the area are medium and semi-medium
farmers with more than 2 hectares of land. As reported during
consultations with land sellers and Suzlon land team, most farmers still
are left with many acres of land after the land sale.
As reported by Suzlon team, land was only being purchased from farmers
having more than 5 acres of land and they also do not purchase land from
the marginal communities such as SC/STs in the area.
Moreover, it was understood from the interactions with the land facilitator
that the large farmers (having greater than 5 acres of land) were
approaching the aggregators for selling their land. Since the area is
1.Article 366 (25) of the Indian Constitution defines scheduled tribes as "such tribes or tribal communities or parts of or
groups within such tribes or tribal communities as are deemed under Article 342 to be Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of
this constitution”. The criterion followed for specification of a community, as scheduled tribes are indications of primitive
traits, distinctive culture, geographical isolation, shyness of contact with the community at large, and backwardness. This
criterion is not spelt out in the Constitution but has become well established. (Source: Official website of the Ministry of
Tribal Affairs (MoTA), Government of India (GoI). url: http://tribal.nic.in/Content/DefinitionpRrofiles.aspx. 2 Agriculture Census 2010-11: Schedules and Instructions for Land Record
Sl.No Size Class (Ha.) Farmer Category
1 Below 0.50 ha. 01 Marginal Farmers
2 0.50 ha. – 0.99 ha. 02
3 1.00 ha. – 1.99 ha. 03 Small Farmers
4 2.00 ha. – 2.99 ha. 04 Semi Medium
5 3.00 ha. – 3.99 ha. 05
6 4.00 ha. – 4.99 ha. 06 Medium
7 5.00 ha. – 7.49 ha. 07
8 7.50 ha. – 9.99 ha. 08
9 10.00 ha. – 19.99 ha. 09 Large Farmers
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
drought prone and productivity is low, farmers were eager to sell their
land for a lump sum amount.
It was also understood during consultations that most of the land owners are
considering the sale because the agricultural situation in the area is grim being
a rain shadow region and this has been detailed in the subsequent social
baseline section. Therefore, farmers find it more prudent to sell the land at
market price than holding them for cultivation. They are utilising the land sale
money to meet social obligations (daughter’s marriage etc.), for business
investment or children’s education.
Encroachment
No encroachments were observed in the purchased land parcels as the lands
belong to individual farmers with the necessary title deeds.
Common Property Resources (CPR)
No Common Property Resources were reported or observed to have been
involved or impacted by the project.
NOC from Panchayat
The project proponents have obtained NoCs from the concerned gram
panchayats and the copies of the same in the local language were shared with
ERM. It was also assessed during the field visit that the Suzlon representatives
have cordial relations with the local panchayat.
Wind power policy of the state of Andhra Pradesh
The Energy, Infrastructure and Investment Department of Andhra Pradesh
government has come out with a new Wind Power Policy this February (2016)
following the expiry of its previous policy in 2013.
The policy exempts wind power projects from obtaining any
NOC/Consent for establishment under pollution control laws from AP
Pollution Control Board.
As per the Policy, deemed non-agricultural status will be accorded for the
land where the wind power project is coming up, on payment of
applicable statutory fee.
Cultural heritage
No Cultural heritage sites were reported or identified to have been involved
or impacted by the project.
Status of land Transfer/ Mutation
3.05 acres of land per WTG has been transferred in the name of OUWPPL.
Prior to this the necessary mutation in the land records in the Revenue
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
Department and the process for Change in Land Use (CLU) has been
completed by Suzlon. These documents were not available for review.
Non-agricultural status
The non-agricultural status for the land purchased has also been obtained by
Suzlon prior to the execution of sale deed by paying the required amount to
the Kalyandurga Revenue department.
2.3.2 Land details and existing procurement status for specific components
The land requirement for the various components and the existing
procurement status is captured below.
WTGs
All the WTGs for the project are located on private agricultural land. The
overall land requirement for establishment of 1 WTG is approximately ~3.05
acres.
The land requirement totals to approximately 5 acres per WTG including
the safety zone area and approach roads.
At the time of ERM site visit, Suzlon had completed the land purchase
process for 34 locations of the 48 WTG locations.
The sale deeds have been executed initially in the name of Suzlon and
transfer of sale deed in the name of OUWPPL has been completed for 6
locations at the time of ERM site visit.
Copies of sale deed executed in the name of Suzlon were made available
for review.
Access Roads
The total land requirement for the access road has not been confirmed by
Suzlon/OUWPPL. Each approach road shall be approximately 3 m wide as
reported.
It was reported that in most cases, the existing roads will be upgraded and
used for the project.
The internal road length is estimated to be about 32.3 km and the land
purchase process for the approach roads have been completed along with
the land purchase for the WTGs.
Sale deeds for the internal road land area have also been completed for 34
locations out of the 48 in the name of Suzlon and the same was made
available for review.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
Pooling sub station
The 2X100MVA, 33/220KV pooling sub-station for the project is located at
Beluguppa on 28 acres of land. The land was previously agricultural land and
has been purchased from 6 farmers through willing buyer-willing seller
negotiations. The construction work at the sub-station was about to be
completed at the time of ERM site visit.
Transmission Line
The route for internal transmission lines have been finalised by the client and
process of obtaining easement rights for the transmission lines need to be
initiated.
The total length of the internal transmission line has been estimated to be
approximately 25 km. However, the number of poles and the number of
easement deeds to be registered has still not been finalised.
Suzlon reported that most of the internal transmission line will be laid
parallel to the internal roads and therefore they do not foresee much
requirements for easement rights as the roads for internal roads have
already been purchased.
The aerial distance between proposed Pooling sub-station of OUWPPL
and the existing power evacuation gird of AP Transco is 22.2 km. This is
proposed to be connected through the 220 KV external transmission line.
Approximately 85 towers are proposed to be established in the 24.5 km.
proposed transmission line. Land area for establishment of one tower is 10
x 10 sq.mt.
Batching Plant
The project has a single batching plant set up by M/s Top View at
Mylarampalle village. The land where the batching plant has been set up is
owned by Top View and is a 10 acre plot. Top View also has about three
rooms for their batching plant workers within the premises.
2.3.3 Land Purchase Process
Identification/Procurement of land
During the site visit it was reported that the land for the WTG is being
purchased through willing buyer-willing seller negotiations. Suzlon works
through local land aggregators for the negotiation and purchase of land.
Suzlon does not have any land policy or policy for procurement of land.
The criteria for selecting land included:
identification of land by wind resource department of Suzlon;
accessibility – availability of access roads;
affordability – pricing; and
clear title deed.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
The land was initially purchased in the name of Suzlon and following further
mutation of ownership details in the revenue records and the CLU process, 3
acres of WTG land parcels have been transferred in the name of OUWPPL.
Figure 2.2 Land Purchase process for the project
Source: Suzlon
LPI-Land Purchase Intimation
FMB-Field Measurement Book
WTG-Wind Turbine Generator
LAF-Land Acceptance Form
WR-Wind Resource
CAD- Computer aided, design or drawing
Market Rate
The prevailing guidance value was reported to be INR. 90,000 to 1,20,000 per
acre for unirrigated land and Rs. 1,20, 000 to 1,40,000 per acre for irrigated
land by the local Mandal official.. But as observed from the sale deeds, Suzlon
was offering a higher rate of land purchase to the farmers and was reported to
be approximately INR 5 lakhs/acre.
2.3.4 Stakeholder engagement and GRM
Suzlon or OUWPPL does not have any formal stakeholder engagement plan
or grievance redressal mechanisms. There are no minutes recorded even for
the land purchase negotiations. However, Orange Power has a Coporate CSR
Policy and their CSR team will undertake a need assessment survey in the
local villages prior to rolling out their CSR activities in the local villages post
commissioning of the project.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
2.3.5 Labour
At peak construction, Suzlon and its contractors are expected to have more
than 300 labourers. Most of the civil workers are locally sourced and there will
be no labour camps set up for the project. Moreover, few migrant laborers
were working at the sub-station site for M/s KSA, their electrical sub-
contractor and under M/s Top View, their batching plant sub-contractor.
However, since the construction work at the sub-station was nearing
completion, most of the migrant workers of KSA had left the site and there
were only about 10 migrant labourers from Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan.
Their camps were temporary structures made from tin sheets that will be
demolished once they leave the site.
2.4 PROJECT COMPONENTS
2.4.1 Wind Turbine Generators (WTGs)
2.4.2 Wind Farm
As mentioned in Chapter 1, the Wind Farm project will comprise of 48 WTGs
of the Suzlon S111 model, each with individual capacities of 2.1MW, hence
totalling to approximately 100.8 MW. The technical specifications have been
elaborated upon in Table 2.3
Table 2.3 Technical Specifications of Suzlon S111 turbine
Parameters Values
Operating Data
Wind Class IEC IIIA
Rated Power 2,100 kW
Cut-in Wind Speed 3 m/s
Rated Wind Speed 10 m/s
Cut-out Wind Speed 21 m/s
Rotor
Rotor Diameter 111.8 m
Swept area 9,817 m2
Generator
Frequency 50/ 60 Hz
Type Asynchronous 3 phase
induction generator with slip
rings operated with rotor
circuit inverter system ( DFIG)
Tower Hub Heights 90 m
Type Tubular Steel Tower /
Hybrid Lattice - Tubular
Tower*
Blade Suzlon Make SB54
Asynchronous Induction Generator with 6 poledesign and
DFIG enable variable speed operation and accommodate
fluctuating utility demands through optimal reactive
power to feed the necessary consumption patterns. It
makes the S111 turbines grid friendly and fully compliant
with stringent grid related requirements, such as Indian
Electricity Grid Code 2014.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
Parameters Values
Wind Class IEC IIIA
Key Design features
Six yaw drives enable enhanced control, balancing and
load sharing, making the S111 turbine more stable and
responsive.
The SB54 blades, designed and manufactured by Suzlon
are tested for the total lifecycle (one million cycle).
Safe & efficient nacelle design features improved
ventilation for better air cooling within the nacelle and an
onboard crane for ease of maintenance.
Source: 2.1 MW Platform Brochure (S97/ S111)
Associated ancillary facilities and utilities such as the following will be
required as part of larger wind farm site planning:
Transmission line for power evacuation connecting to 33kVA substation;
Transmission line for connecting the 220 KV, D/C EHV line from wind
farm substation to the existing government sub station in Mopidi;
Metering point for measuring production from each WTGs;
Pathways and access roads – both inter-site and intra-site;
Material storage yards and stores;
Scrap yards;
Parking bays;
Transit storage areas; and
Central Monitoring Station (CMS) building and facilities.
2.4.3 Pooling Sub Station and Power Evacuation Arrangements
The pooling substation is situated approximately 1.3 km east of the village of
Beluguppa. At the time of the site visit, in May 2016, construction of the
pooling sub station was still under progress with electrical components being
installed for eventual commissioning of the Project. It was understood that
the power generated from each of the 48 WTGs will be stepped up to 33 KV
via transformers that are installed within each of the 48 WTGs. The power will
be transmitted through OFC cables from each WTG to DP yard and then
connected to 33 KV DCOH internal transmission line (totalling to
approximately 25 km) that are of Rolled Steel Joist (RSJ) type, from where it
will be transmitted to the pooling substation located in the village of
Beluguppa. It was understood that the construction for the internal
transmission line was in progress. Approximately 10x10 m area of land has
been utilised for the installation of the poles for the transmission line. The 48
WTGs are connected via a system of 4 feeders (viz. Feeder #.5, Feeder #4,
Feeder #6 and Feeder #2) , each utilising the S/C AL59 Dog Line.
With regard to the external transmission line, evacuation from the Pooling Sub
Station will be via network of 220 KV DCOH zebra conductor line of approx.
22 .2 km and was in the final stages of construction.The external transmission
line passes evacuates its power to the 400/ 220 kV Government Sub Station in
the village of Mopidi (Figure 2.4).
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P. PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
Figure 2.3 33/ 220 kV Substation located near the village of Beluguppa
Source: ERM site visit, May 2016.
Figure 2.4 Evacuation of power from the 220 KV DCOH line from the pooling Sub
Station, eventually termination at the Government Substation, in the village
of Mopidi.
Source: ERM site visit, May 2016.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
33
2.4.4 Supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA)/ Condition Monitoring
System (CMS)
Based on the discussion with the OUWPPL personnel, it was understood that
the Supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA)/ Condition Monitoring
System (CMS) would be set up within the pooling sub station building, near
the village of Beluguppa and would be responsible for day to day monitoring
and real time reporting of the 48 WTGs that form the scope of the Project.
2.4.5 Storage Yard
Based on discussions with the Suzlon and OUWPPL, it was understood that
WTG components as well as heavy lifting vehicles and earth moving locations
were stored at the storage yard (of area of 20 acres) in the village of
Gangavaram that was managed by Suzlon (Figure 2.5). The site office was also
situated within the storage yard premesis.
Figure 2.5 Storage yard in the village of Gangavaram used for storage of WTG
components. The site office is also located, here.
Source: ERM site visit, May 2016.
2.4.6 Batching Plant
The project has a single batching plant set up by M/s Top View at
Mylarampalle village. The 10 acre plot has been utilised for storage of raw
material for construction purposes as well as construction equipment (viz.
Excavator /Breakers, JCB’s, supporting cranes etc.) It was also understood
that a mobile batching plant was being utilised for the Project.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
34
Figure 2.6 Equipment set up in the batching plant for the Project (Location:
Mylarampalle village)
Source: ERM site visit, May 2016.
2.4.7 Access Road and Site Access
The road connectivity to the Project area is via State Highway 82, which is
located towards the south of the Project area and is a primary means of access
and material movement. Site access is also available via the Zilla Parishad/
village (bituminous and ‘Kuccha’) roads that are means of access to villages
within the Project area. Access to some of the locations involved travelling
over unpaved roads. The road nertwork has been utilised for the
transportation of WTG components by a majority of the wind power
companies that are operating in the area. The types of roads that are situated
in the Project area of influence are presented in Figure 2.7.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
35
Figure 2.7 Type of Roadways present within the Project Area (a) Kuccha Roads
Beluguppa Village (b) Internal Access Roads- Avulenna village (c) State
Highway -82 and (d) Heavy vehicles plying on State Highway -82
Source: ERM Site Visit, June 2016
2.5 PROJECT ACTIVITIES
The Project activities can be divided into four phases as follows: (a) Planning;
(b) Construction; (c) Operations & Maintenance; and (d) Decommissioning.
2.5.1 Planning Phase
The pre-construction phase has four components:
Identification of land area and site;
Site surveys as topographic, geo-technical investigations, micro-siting
studies, electrical grid studies etc.;
All necessary approvals/clearances; and
Design and finalization of contractors;
2.5.2 Construction
Construction stage activities in a wind farm site would include the following:
Site preparation, including subcontractor mobilisation, erection of fencing
or suitable barriers, construction of site compound and lay down areas;
Upgrading and construction of internal roads;
Site clearance;
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
36
Establishment of borrow pits;
Laying of turbine foundations, turbine delivery and installation;
Completion of pooling substations;
Completion of internal electrical connections and external transmission
line;
Turbine testing to verify proper operation of the facility; and
Commissioning.
2.5.3 Operations & Maintenance
The list of activities to be carried out in the operation and maintenance phase
would be:
Half yearly and Annual maintenance scheduled activities at each WTG
location;
Routine inspection of all WTGs;
Operation and maintenance of ancillary facilities such as yards, stores,
CMS building facilities;
Inspection and maintenance of transmission lines; and
Inspection and maintenance of intra-site pathways/access roads.
The wind turbines will operate at all times provided wind speeds are suitable
with the exception of downtime required for maintenance activities. For the
most part, day to day facility operations will be automated through the use of
computerised networking systems. A team of technical wind farm
maintenance specialists would be employed by the project during the
operations phase. The team will also comprise of administrative staff, security
for general maintenance of the wind farm site.
2.5.4 Decommissioning
The decommissioning activities include:
Replace operating WTG turbine with new one of higher capacity or
superior technology;
Abandon the project operations and remove WTG parts and ancillary
facilities;
Remove transmission lines; and
Return intra-site access roads.
If decommissioned all components, excluding turbine foundations and
internal roads of the Project would be removed and the site be rehabilitated.
The concrete pedestals of the turbine foundations would be cut down and
concrete removed to below finished ground level and covered with topsoil.
Infrastructure (such as roads, transmission lines etc.) is likely to be handed
over to the government for their use. Some roads will be removed, covered
with soil and replanted to allow for a return to previous land-use (forest, one-
time cultivation and grazing).
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
37
2.6 RESOURCE REQUIREMNTS FOR THE PROJECT
2.6.1 Water Requirement
Construction Phase
As per discussions with Suzlon personnel, approximately 3360 m3 of water
will be required for civil works during the construction of the foundation for
all WTGs estimating 70 m3 of water to be utilised for each WTG.
Approximately 12 m3 of water would be utilised during the construction of the
DP Yard. Potable water (reverse osmosis treated) for the workers for drinking
and sanitation purposes, assuming 10 workers at one WTG site and
construction of 5 WTGs at a given point of time, is envisaged to be
approximately 6 m3 per day.
Operation Phase
Approximately 2-3 m3 per day of water is envisaged to be required during the
operational activities considering that 15 employees are present at any given
time. Water will be sourced via tankers from nearby villages, particularly,
Beluguppa, Srirangapuram, and Thagguparthi.
2.6.2 Raw Materials and Equipment
Construction Phase
For the construction of the foundation of each WTG, raw materials like steel,
sand, stone and cement will be required. The estimated quantities for the raw
materials are provided in Table 2.4. lists the quantity of raw material to be
utilised during the construction phase. The type of equipment as seen during
the site visit has been presented in Table 2.5.
Table 2.4 List and quantity of raw material to be utilised for the WTG foundation
activities during the construction phase (tonnes per WTG)
List of
Construction
materials
Quantity (tonnes)
per WTG
Quantity
(tonnes) to be
utilsied for DP
Yard
Source of
Material
Mode of
transportation and
storage site
Cement (in MT) 189 3.25
Private venders Truck/Cement
shed at Batching
Plant
Grouting cement
(in MT) 3 0
Private venders Truck/Storage yard
Sand (in MT) 409 7 Private venders Truck/Storage yard 20 mm Aggregate
(in MT) 307
8
Private venders Truck/Storage yard
10 mm Aggregate
(in MT) 307
0
Private venders Truck/Storage yard
Steel (in MT) 27 0.6 Private venders Truck/Storage yard Admixture (in ltr) 1250 0 Private venders Truck/Storage yard Source: OUWPPL
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
38
Table 2.5 Equipment type and quantity to be utilised during the construction phase
Construction equipment Approximate Equipment Number
Equipment for Electrical Work
DG set (15 kVA) 1
Welding M/C 1
Cutter, Drill M/c 1
Vehicle (Tractor/Utility) 1
Hydra 1
Boring/piling M/C 1
JCB 1
Equipment for civil work
Batching Plant 1
Transit Mixers -TM 6
Cube test Machine 1
Concrete pumps 1
Cube Moulds 200
Grouting cube moulds 15
Trailer 1
Water tank 1
shutter set 2
Excavator /Breaker 1
Hydra 1
JCB 2
DG set (15 kVA) 4
Welding M/C 1
Equipment for mechanical work
650 T Main crane 1
180 T supporting crane 1
80T supporting crane 1
70T supporting crane 1
Hydra 1
JCB/Excavator 1
Source: OUWPPL
2.6.3 Fuel requirement and Storage
Construction Phase
The onsite fuel requirement during construction will be about approximately
80-90 liters /day, which shall be transported by tanker trucks. The fuel will be
stored in a diesel bunker which is located at the storage yard in Gangavaram.
Operation Phase
For each WTG, about 20 litres per annum of oil would be required for the
gearbox and the generator maintenance activities. After the installation of each
WTG, the first service of the WTG will be carried out twice every 3 months
and is called Class A service and the second services will be undertaken again
after 3 months and is termed as Class B service. Subsequently, half yearly
maintenance is carried out and the waste oil is sent to oil recycler. The waste
oil generated is very negligible.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
39
2.6.4 Power Requirement
Construction Phase
Power will be supplemented using DG Sets during the installation of the
WTGs as well as for the storage area. Permanent power has been established
at both the batching and site office. Each location has 1 DG set. There are 5
mobile DG sets that operate the concrete pumps during excavation. Each DG
set is of the capacity of 15 kVA.
Operations Phase
No power back up source is envisaged during the operation stage. WTG
maintenance will be done with the aid of battery packs that are charged and
available at each WTG.
2.6.5 Pollution Control-Embedded Measures
2.6.6 Air Emissions
Construction Phase
Likely emissions into the ambient air from the project during the construction
phase will include:
Fugitive emissions from WTG site preparations works, such as excavation,
clearing, filling etc. and use of construction machinery;
Fugitive dust emissions from unpaved roads owing to transportation of
manpower and equipment;
Vehicular emission from increased traffic activity during the construction
stages;
Emissions form DG sets; and
Dust emissions from batching plant
The control measures for these emissions are as follows:
Fugitive dust emission from site preparation and the use of construction
machinery will be mitigated through maintaining the vehicular speed to
10 – 15 km/hr;
Soil will be used for back filling. Vehicular emission will be controlled
through proper maintenance of vehicles and vehicles with proper PUC
will be operated at project site;
DG sets to be used will have adequate stack height as per CPCB norms;
Fugitive dust emission arising out of various activities in the batching
plants will be mitigated through better material handling and provision of
enclosure around the facility
Operations and Maintenance Phase
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
40
During the operations phase there will be no air emissions form the WG areas.
However, there will be gaseous and fugitive dust emissions owing to plying
of maintenance vehicles. It will be ensured that well maintained vehicles with
proper PUC are used for maintenance purposes. DG sets deployed as back-up
power, will emit a limited amount of gaseous pollutants into the ambient air.
2.6.7 Noise Emissions
Construction Phase
During the construction phase noise will be generated primarily during the day time. Noise will be generated from moving vehicles as well as construction equipment, including the DG sets utilized for power. Since there are no localities in the vicinity of the proposed Project area, the only receptors of noise pollution are the construction workers.
As a control measure it will be ensured that noise emission from the vehicles and equipment’s shall not exceed 91 dB(A) (for Passenger or commercial vehicles with gross vehicle weight above 12000 kg as specified in Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989). DG sets will be provided with acoustic enclosures and workers near noise generating machines will be provided with ear plugs as safeguard against high noise hazards.
Operations Phase
While in operation, wind turbines produce noise from mechanical and
aerodynamic sources:
Aerodynamic noise emanates from the movement of air around the
turbine blades and tower. The types of aerodynamic noise may include
low frequency, impulsive low frequency, tonal, and continuous
broadband. In addition, the amount of noise may rise with increasing
rotation speed of the turbine blades, therefore turbine designs which allow
lower rotational speeds in higher winds will limit the amount of noise
generated;
Mechanical noise may be generated by machinery in the nacelle of the
wind turbines.
As mentioned earlier in this report, the Wind Farm project will comprise of 48
WTGs of the Suzlon S111 model, each with individual capacities of 2.1MW,
hence totalling to approximately 100.8 MW. The technical specifications have
been elaborated upon in Table 2.3.
2.6.8 Waste Management
Construction Phase
The solid waste generated by the project will consist of labour camp waste,
garbage waste, metal scrap, and excess construction materials. The main types
of waste that will be generated and sources are shown in Table 2.6.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
41
Table 2.6 Waste Generated, their sources and method of disposal
SN. Waste Type Source and location Method of Disposal
1 Domestic solid waste Labour activities on
site, canteen/rest area
Waste will be segregated onsite and will
be disposed of at site as approved by
local authority.
2 Construction Debris
(excavated earth)
Construction of WTG,
Access road,
substation, Storage
yard etc.
All excavated materials to be used for
backfilling and levelling and other
debris shall be used for road
construction.
3 Packaging waste
containing wood,
cardboard and other
recyclables
Packing material for
WTGs and
Accessories and
storage yard
Return back to the suppliers or used as
storage boxes/racks at site.
4 Sludge from
Wastewater Septic
Tanks
Site Office, toilets
Collected and disposed of through
contractors
5 Used oil/ waste oil DG set, construction
machinery on site
Collected and disposed of through
approved recyclers in accordance to
Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management
and Transboundary Movement) Rules,
2016, as amended.
6 Oil contaminated
rags
Cleaning activities at
WTG sites and
substation
Collected and disposed of through
Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management
and Transboundary Movement) Rules,
2016, as amended
Operations Phase
During operation phase, the waste generated from project will include
domestic solid waste at SCADA and substation and hazardous waste like
waste oil, lubricants and oil contaminated rags will be generated during
maintenance activities;
The hazardous wastes will be stored onsite at separate designated covered
area provided with impervious flooring. The storage containers/ bins/
drum will be clearly marked and identified for their hazards;
The hazardous wastes will be disposed of in accordance to Hazardous
Waste (Management, Handling and Transboundary Movement) Rules,
2016, as amended, through APPCB/ CPCB approved vendors;
Non-recyclable material will be collected, segregated onsite and handed
over to local Municipal Corporation for disposal;
Sewage will be disposed of through septic tanks and soak pits.
2.6.9 Wastewater Management
Construction Phase
The liquid effluents generated during the construction phase will include
domestic sewage from project site office;
As part of the site preparation stage, a drainage and sewerage system will
be constructed for the site office. The sewerage system will consist of soak
pits for the collection of waste water from the camp kitchen and washing
areas. Sewage from the toilets will go into lined septic tanks. Sewage
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
42
disposal trucks will be used to periodically remove the sludge/sewage
from the site.
Operations Phase
The operation phase will have negligible wastewater generation. Septic tank
and soak pits will be provided at SCADA building and CMS monitoring
station for disposal of sewage.
2.6.10 Fire Safety and Security
Construction
Appropriate firefighting system and equipment shall be provided throughout
the construction period. The fire extinguishers will be placed at all strategic
locations such as camp site, site office, storage yard, heavy construction
machinery etc. Besides this, emergency contact numbers shall also be
displayed onsite.
Operations Phase
Structural fire protection
Wind Turbines are designed with fire-resistant material, with a majority of
components to be made up of metal. Potentially flammable components
would include rotor blades and the panelling of the machine house, which are
made from glass-fibre reinforced plastic, electric cables and electrical
components, Gear box, transformer and hydraulic oils, hoses and other plastic
components.
Fire prevention
The service personnel will take all appropriate measures to prevent fires.
Lightening and Fire protection system will be based on relevant standards.
Overcurrent protection via the Suzlon Control System (SCS) and air circuit
breaker, which is available as a standard in all WTGs that are manufactured
by Suzlon. Local regulations shall take precedence where these are more
restrictive than the above international standards.
Fire extinguishers
Fire extinguishers and sand buckets will be maintained at each WTG and will
be of dry chemical type. These extinguishers are meant for immediate fighting
of fire in early stages until the fire responders arrive.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
43
2.7 PROJECT ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
2.7.1 Orange Uravakonda Wind Power Pvt. Ltd.
The main responsibility of the project activities comes under the purview of
the Project Manager. Personnel assigned to responsibilities pertaining to (i)
Health, Safety and Environment (ii) electrical concerns (iii) civil engineering
concerns (iv) mechanical engineering concerns (v) store and supplies and (v)
legal affairs. The organisation chart has been detailed in Figure 2.8.
Figure 2.8 Project Organisational structure: Orange Uravakonda Wind Power Pvt. Ltd
Source: OUWPPL
2.7.2 Suzlon Gujarat Wind Park Ltd.
Suzlon Gujarat Wind Park Ltd. is the overall developer of the Project and is
also responsible for the installation of the electro-mechanical works of the
wind turbines. At Suzlon, the organization is led by the Head- projects who in
turn reports to the overall Project Head at the corporate level. The Project
Coordinator at the site who works in close liaison with the Suzlon personnel
at the site. The organisational structure of Suzlon Gujarat Wind Park Ltd. has
been presented in Figure 2.9.
C Balakrishnan
Project Manager
Projects
Aakash Kumar
Senior Engineer
Civil
Aman Sharma
Deputy Manager
Electrical
Pradip Shewale
Senior Engineer
Mechanical
Venugopal Reddy
Executive
Stores
Vijay Bhaskar
Manager
HSE
KSVSS Murthy
Deputy Manager
Legal
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
44
Figure 2.9 Organisational structure of Suzlon Gujarat Wind Park Ltd.
Source: Suzlon
2.8 CORPORATE POLICIES
Orange Renewable Power Pvt. Ltd.
Orange Renewable Power Pvt. Ltd. have an overarching Health, Safety and
Environment (HSE) Policy (dated 21/09/2015) which ensures that;
No harm is caused to people, property and environment;
Sustainable development is ensured to minimised any adverse impacts to
the environment and communities surrounding the projects;
Legal requirements and best practices are complied with pertaining to
HSE; and
Contractors associated with Orange projects are aligned with Orange’s
policies.
The HSE policy of Orange is presented in Annex B.
2.8.1 Suzlon Gujarat Wind Park Ltd.
Suzlon Gujarat Wind Park Ltd. has listed all their corporate governance
policies on their website and these include Code of Ethics, CSR Policy and
Corporate Governance Policy. However, HSE policy was not available on the
webite nor was the same shared by the client.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
45
3 ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This section highlights the environmental and social regulations applicable to
the Project. At the outset, it should be emphasized that this administrative
framework focuses on:
IFC Performance Standards (2012) 1 to 8;
The applicable IFC / World Bank Guidelines: o The General EHS Guidelines, o EHS Guidelines for Wind Energy, August 2015; o Guidelines for Power Transmission and Distribution, 2007 (for
construction and operation of transmission lines in windfarm); and
o EHS Guidelines for Toll Roads, 2007 (for road infrastructure of wind farm); and
Applicable local, national and international environmental and social legislation will also be considered as part of the study.
3.1 PERMITTING STATUS OF THE PROJECT
3.1.1 EIA Notification (2006) and its amendments
As per the EIA Notification (2006) and its amendments, the project does not
require any environmental clearance from the Ministry of Environment Forest
and Climate Change (MoEFCC) or the State Environmental Impact
Assessment Authority (SEIAA).
3.1.2 Central Pollution Control Board
As per latest notification from the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB),
dated 07/03/2016 (Ref No: B-29012/ ESS (CPA)/2015-2016, “Solar power
generation through solar photovoltaic cell, wind power and mini hydel power
(less than 25 MW)” has been classified to “white category” from “green
category” and therefore “there shall be no necessity in obtaining ‘Consent to
Establish and Operate” for white category of industries and an intimation to
the concerned SPCB and PCC office”.
3.1.3 Andhra Pradesh Wind Power Policy of 2015
As per the Andhra Pradesh Wind Power Policy of 2015, wind Power Projects
have been categorized into three categories i.e. Category I, Category II and
Category III and have been elaborated in the table below:
Table 3.1 Categorisation of wind power projects as per A.P. Wind Power Policy, 2015
Category Parameter
Category I Projects set up in government/revenue lands
or forest areas or assigned lands and also in
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
46
Category Parameter
private lands selling power within the state.
Category II Projects set up for captive use or group captive
use/3rd party sale within or outside the state.
Category III Sale of power at average power purchase cost
and availing Renewable Energy Certificate
(REC)
As per the policy, the project falls under Category I. The guidelines of
Category 1 projects have been elaborated in the Box, below.
Box 3.1 Category I guidelines, as per the A.P. Wind Power Policy, 2015
Source: A.P. Wind Power Policy, 2015
3.2 INSTITUTION FRAMEWORK- ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES
A brief description of the relevant enforcement agencies with respect to the
institutional framework is described in the following Table 3.2:
Table 3.2 Enforcement Agencies relevant to the Project
Agency Functions Relevance & Applicability to the
project
National
Institute of
Wind Energy (
formerly
Centre for
Wind Energy
Technology (C-
WET))
Research & Development
Wind Resource Assessment Unit:
Standards and Certification Unit:
R&D Testing unit
Not a regulatory requirement.
Ideally, the report will be prepared
by a 3rd party vendor (e.g. 3 Tier,
AWS True power, etc.) on behalf of
Suzlon, for OUWPPL.
Ministry of
New and
Renewable
Energy
(MNRE)
The Ministry of New and Renewable
Energy (MNRE) is the nodal Ministry
of the Government of India for all
matters relating to renewable energy.
The broad aim of the Ministry is to
Project has to be based on MNRE
guidelines.
Power generated from the wind power projects installed entirely or partly on
government/ revenue land or forest areas shall be for sale within the State only.
The Govt. of A.P. may consider proposals for allotment of revenue land if available –
at the wind power potential areas on first come first serve basis- based on
recommendation of NREDCAP, as per the provisions of New Land Allotment Policy
announced by the Government vide G.O. Ms. No: 571, Dt: 14-09-2012 of Revenue
(Assignment-I) Dept.;
To facilitate faster execution of projects, the district collector shall handover advance
possession of land including pathways to NREDCAP and the land shall be allotted in
the joint name of NREDCAP and the Developer. The concerned district collector after
taking into account all the necessary undertakings of land proposal shall permit the
developer to start the construction. NREDCAP shall withdraw its rights from the land
once the project gets commissioned.
In case of forest areas, the developers shall submit the application through the Nodal
Agency to the forest department, to consider for allotment as per the
guidelines/regulations laid down by the forest department from time to time.
If the wind farm is set up in private land then the Eligible Developer shall procure the
land from landholders on their own.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
47
Agency Functions Relevance & Applicability to the
project
develop and deploy new and
renewable energy for supplementing
the energy requirements of the country.
The Ministry facilitate research, design,
development, manufacture and
deployment of new and renewable
energy systems/devices for
transportation, portable and stationary
applications in rural, urban, industrial
and commercial sectors.
Central
Electricity
Authority
(CEA)
The Central Electricity Authority (CEA)
is a statutory organization constituted
under Section 3 of the repealed
Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, here in
after replaced by the Electricity Act,
2003. Some of the functions performed
by CEA include the following :
Advise the Central Government on
the matters relating to the national
electricity policy, formulate short-
term and perspective plans for
development of the electricity
system and coordinate activities of
the planning agencies for the
optimal utilization of resources to
sub-serve the interests of the
national economy and to provide
reliable and affordable electricity
to all consumers;
Specify the technical standards for
construction of electrical plants,
electric lines and connectivity to
the grid;
Specify the safety requirements for
construction, operation and
maintenance of electrical plants
and electric lines;
Advise any State Government,
licensees or the generating
companies on such matters which
shall enable them to operate and
maintain the electricity system
under their ownership or control in
an improved manner and where
necessary, in coordination with
any other Government, licensee or
the generating company owning or
having the control of another
electricity system; etc.
Project will be developed based on
technical standards of CEA for
electrical lines and connectivity to
grid.
Indian
Renewable
Energy
Development
Agency Ltd.
(IREDA)
The main objectives of IREDA is to
promote, develop and extend financial
support to specific projects and
schemes for generating electricity and /
or energy through new and renewable
sources and conserving energy through
energy efficiency.
Not mandatory, however required if
loan is taken from IREDA
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
48
Agency Functions Relevance & Applicability to the
project
New and
Renewable
Development
Corporation of
Andhra
Pradesh Ltd.
The objectives of the NREDCAP are:
To survey, develop and implement
renewable energy programmes of
the State and Central Government;
To generate electricity through
renewable sources like wind and
solar on decentralised manner;
To conserve energy in rural areas;
To import and adopt viable
technology and machinery in the
areas of Non-Conventional energy
sources and ensure post
installation service.;
To impart training and to promote
research and development in the
field of Non-conventional energy
sources; and
To provide technical consultancy
services in implementation of
power projects through renewable
energy sources.-conventional
energy sources.
Project should be developed based
on the NREDCAP guidelines for
renewable energy
Andhra
Pradesh
Transmission
Corporation
(APTRANSCO)
The main responsibility of
APTRANSCO are:
Operating the transmission
infrastructure within the state
Commissioning , operation and
maintenance of EHV substation
Energy received at EHV substation
and energy delivered to electricity
distribution companies.
The Project should be developed
based on APTRANSCO’s Policy for
promoting generation of electricity
from wind.
State Labour
Department
All issues pertaining to implementation
of labour laws in any establishment,
shop or factory.
Labours to be involved during the
construction phase and few in the
operation should be provided with
wages and other facilities with state
as well as local labour laws and acts.
National Green
Tribunal
The tribunal will have jurisdiction over
all civil cases relating to
implementation of the following
regulations:
The Water Act, 1974;
The Water Cess Act, 1977;
The Forest Conservation Act, 1980;
The Air Act, 1981;
The Environment Protection Act,
1986;
The Public Liability Insurance Act,
1991; and
The Biological Diversity Act, 2002
The Act provides for compensation on
account of following
Relief and compensation to the
victims of pollution and other
environmental damage arising
U/s 17, any person responsible for
any untoward incidents (defined in
Schedule II of the Act) is liable to pay
relief or compensation as determined
by the tribunal, failing which a
penalty (u/s 26 and 27) is imposable
which may lead to imprisonment up
to 3 years or fine up to INR 10 Crores
or both and an additional fine of INR
25,000 per day for any delay, which
may further be increased to INR one
lac per day.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
49
Agency Functions Relevance & Applicability to the
project
under enactment of the above acts;
Restitution of property damaged;
and
Restitution of the environment.
Gram
Panchayats
The local Panchayats are empowered
with management of local resources
like forests, groundwater, common
land and infrastructure like roads,
buildings, etc.
NOCs are required from the
Panchayats at the time of initiating a
project in local area. Panchayats are
also empowered to levy and collect
local taxes on land, property and
provisioning of facilities.
District
Administration
(Collector’s
Office)
Private land purchase process by the
land aggregator will be regularized by
the state government under Andhra
Pradesh Rules under Registration Act
1908 through District collector and
revenue department
Land purchase process for the
various components of project such
as WTG, substation, roads , batching
plant etc would be followed as per
State Land revenue code and land
registration act of Andhra Pradesh.
3.3 APPLICABLE REGULATORY/ POLICY FRAMEWORK
Table 3.3 summarizes the key regulations that are relevant to the project
across its lifecycle. This table should be used to update/develop a
comprehensive legal register for the Project which can be regularly monitored
for compliance as well as updated to reflect changes/non-applicability of
regulations, policies and standards.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
50
Table 3.3 Applicable environmental and social legislative framework for wind power projects
Applicable Indian Legislation/Guidelines
Pre
-co
nst
ruct
ion
Co
nst
ruct
ion
Op
era
tio
ns
Dec
om
mis
sio
nin
g Agency Responsible Remark/ Status
Land Purchase
A. P. Land Revenue Code X X District collector
and revenue
department
The applicability of these regulations is for purchase of private land.
Forest Conservation Act 1980 and as amended in 1988 X X MoEFCC The applicability of these regulations is for diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes.
Environment Protection
Environment Protection Act, 1986 and as amended APPCB
CPCB
MoEFCC
Permissible limits for ambient air quality, water quality, noise limits has been laid down by CPCB
under EP Act, 1986, which requires to be complied with.
The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, as amended X X X X APPCB
As per A.P. Wind Power Policy, 2015, the project is exempted from obtaining Consent to Establish
(CTE) before start of construction activities and Consent to Operate (CTO) before commissioning of
the project from APPCB.
The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981, as amended X X X X APPCB
As per A.P. Wind Power Policy, 2015, , the project is exempted from obtaining Consent to Establish
before start of construction activities and Consent to Operate before commissioning of the project
from APPCB
The Noise (Regulation & Control) Rules, 2000 and as amended up to 2010
APPCB
As per the Act, ambient noise levels are to be maintained as stipulated in the rules for different
categories of areas such as residential, commercial, industrial and silence zones. Considering the
context of the project, OUWPPL and Suzlon will need to abide by the limits prescribed for
residential zones.
Handling of Hazardous Wastes
Hazardous Wastes (Management Handling and Trans boundary Movement) Rules, 2008 and
as amended
X APPCB Generation of waste oil and transformer oil at site attracts the provisions of Hazardous and Other
Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016, as amended. The hazardous
wastes have to dispose through approved recyclers only.
Labour and Working Conditions
Andhra Pradesh Factories Rules 1950 X X Deputy Chief
Inspector of
Factories
OUWPPL/ Suzlon needs to comply to all requirement of factories rules and participate in periodic
inspection during the Operations Phase
Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of
Service) Act, 1996;
Inter-state Migrant Workmen (Regulation of Employment and Condition of Service) Act,
1979;
Contract Labour Act, 1970
X State Department of
Labour
OUWPPL/ Suzlon and their contractors need to comply to the requirements of the these
regulations
The Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986;
The Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act 1976;
Minimum Wages Act, 1948;
Equal Remuneration Act 1976;
Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923;
Maternity Benefit Act, 1961.
X State Department of
Labour
OUWPPL/ Suzlon will need to comply to the requirements of the these regulations
Companies Act, 2013 X X X OUWPPL/ Suzlon According to Schedule 135 sub-section 1, the companies meeting the threshold criteria specified should spend in every financial year, at least 2% of the average net profits of the company made during the three immediately preceding financial years, in pursuance of CSR Policy.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
51
Applicable Indian Legislation/Guidelines
Pre
-co
nst
ruct
ion
Co
nst
ruct
ion
Op
era
tio
ns
Dec
om
mis
sio
nin
g Agency Responsible Remark/ Status
The project will need to comply with the requirements as stated in the law, if it attracts provision under above mentioned schedule.
Applicable International Conventions
Conventions on the Conservation of Migratory species of wild animals and migratory species State Forest
Department
Migratory bird in the project area bears protection from killing under Convention of Migratory
Species (CMS) to which India is a signatory.
Kyoto Protocol: The 3rd Conference of the Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate
Change (FCCC) in Kyoto in December 1997 introduced the Clean Development Mechanism
(CDM) as a new concept for voluntary greenhouse-gas emission reduction agreements.
NATCOM The project being a wind power generation project becomes the basis for qualifying for Clean
Development Mechanism.
IFC/ World Bank Guidelines
IFC Performance Standards IFC The ESIA report has been prepared on lines of IFC Performance Standards (2012).
IFC/WB General EHS Guidelines X IFC
During the construction, operation and eventual decommissioning of the site, these guidelines need
to be followed. IFC Guidelines for Power Transmission and Distribution X
IFC Guidelines for Wind Energy Projects X
IFC Guidance on Worker Accommodation X
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
52
3.4 NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS
The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) has stipulated different
environmental standards w.r.t. ambient air quality, noise quality, water and
waste water for the country as a whole under EP Act, 1986. Following
standards are applicable to the project and need to be complied with during
the project life cycle.
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQ Standards), as
prescribed by MoEFCC vide, Gazette Notification dated 16th November, 2009;
Drinking water quality- Indian Drinking Water Standard (IS 10500: 2012);
General standards for discharge as prescribed under the Environment
Protection Rules, 1986 and amendments (G.S.R 422 (E) dated 19.05.1993
and G.S.R 801 (E) dated 31.12.1993 issued under the provisions of E (P) Act
1986);
Noise standards specified by the MoEFCC vide Gazette notification dated
14th February, 2000 (Noise Pollution (Regulation and control) Rules, 2000);
and
The Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary
Movement) Rules, 2016.
Details of different environmental standards are provided in Annex C.
IFC/ WB Standards
The General EHS guidelines (30th April 2007) of IFC/ WB have outlined
following environmental standards which needs to be complied for the
project.
IFC/WB Air Emissions and Ambient Air Quality Standards;
IFC/WB Guidelines for treated sanitary sewage discharges;
IFC/WB Noise Standards.
3.5 INTERNATIONAL SAFEGUARD REQUIREMENTS
3.5.1 IFC Requirements
IFC applies the Performance Standards (1) to manage social and environmental
risks and impacts and to enhance development opportunities in its private
sector financing in its member countries eligible for financing. The
Performance Standards may also be applied by other financial institutions
choosing to support them in the proposed project. These performance
standards and guidelines provide ways and means to identify impacts and
affected stakeholders and lay down processes for management and mitigation
(1) http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/Content/PerformanceStandards
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
53
of adverse impacts. Together, the Client is required to meet the stipulations of
all the eight Performance Standards throughout the life of an investment in
the case such an investment is being sought either form IFC or any other
institution which follows IFC standards.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
54
Table 3.4 IFC Performance Standards
IFC-
PS.
Description Objectives
1 Assessment and
Management of
Environmental and Social
Risks and Impacts
To identify and evaluate environmental and social risks and impacts of the project;
To adopt a mitigation hierarchy to anticipate and avoid, or where avoidance is not possible, minimize and,
where residual impacts remain, compensate/offset for risks and impacts to workers, Affected Communities,
and the environment;
To promote improved environmental and social performance of clients through the effective use of
management systems;
To ensure that grievances from Affected Communities and external communications from other stakeholders
are responded to and managed appropriately; and
To promote and provide means for adequate engagement with Affected Communities throughout the project
cycle on issues that could potentially affect them and to ensure that relevant environmental and social
information is disclosed and disseminated.
2 Labour and Working
Conditions
To promote the fair treatment, non-discrimination, and equal opportunity of workers;
To establish, maintain, and improve the worker-management relationship;
To promote compliance with national employment and labor laws;
To protect workers, including vulnerable categories of workers such as children, migrant workers, workers
engaged by third parties, and workers in the client’s supply chain;
To promote safe and healthy working conditions, and the health of workers; and
To avoid the use of forced labor.
3 Resource Efficiency and
Pollution Prevention
To avoid or minimize adverse impacts on human health and the environment by avoiding or minimizing
pollution from project activities;
To promote more sustainable use of resources, including energy and water; and
To reduce project-related GHG emissions.
4 Community Health, Safety
and Security
To anticipate and avoid adverse impacts on the health and safety of the Affected Community during the project
life from both routine and non-routine circumstances; and
To ensure that the safeguarding of personnel and property is carried out in accordance with relevant human
rights principles and in a manner that avoids or minimizes risks to the Affected Communities.
5 Land Acquisition and
Involuntary Resettlement
To avoid, and when avoidance is not possible, minimize displacement by exploring alternative project designs;
To avoid forced eviction;
To anticipate and avoid, or where avoidance is not possible, minimize adverse social and economic impacts
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
55
IFC-
PS.
Description Objectives
from land acquisition or restrictions on land use by (i) providing compensation for loss of assets at replacement
cost and (ii) ensuring that resettlement activities are implemented with appropriate disclosure of information,
consultation, and the informed participation of those affected;
To improve, or restore, the livelihoods and standards of living of displaced persons; and
To improve living conditions among physically displaced persons through the provision of adequate housing
with security of tenure5 at resettlement sites
6 Biodiversity Conservation
and Sustainable
Management of Living
Natural Resources
To protect and conserve biodiversity;
To maintain the benefits from ecosystem services; and
To promote the sustainable management of living natural resources through the adoption of practices that
integrates conservation needs and development priorities.
7 Indigenous Peoples To ensure that the development process fosters full respect for the human rights, dignity, aspirations, culture,
and natural resource-based livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples;
To anticipate and avoid adverse impacts of projects on communities of Indigenous Peoples, or when avoidance
is not possible, to minimize and/or compensate for such impacts;
To promote sustainable development benefits and opportunities for Indigenous Peoples in a culturally
appropriate manner;
To establish and maintain an ongoing relationship based on Informed Consultation and Participation (ICP)
with the Indigenous Peoples affected by a project throughout the project’s life-cycle;
To ensure the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) of the Affected Communities of Indigenous Peoples
when the circumstances described in this Performance Standard are present; and
To respect and preserve the culture, knowledge, and practices of Indigenous Peoples.
8 Cultural Heritage To protect cultural heritage from the adverse impacts of project activities and support its preservation; and
To promote the equitable sharing of benefits from the use of cultural heritage.
Source: Source: IFC Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability, 2012 ed.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
56
4 SCREENING AND SCOPING
At the initial stage of the ESIA process, preliminary information was provided
to aid in the determination of what legal and other requirements apply to the
Project. This step was conducted utilising a high level description of the
Project and its associated facilities. The screening process involved the
following:
Reviewing of applicable regulatory framework for the proposed Wind
Power Project;
Reviewing of available Project related activities and their impacts on
various components of environment;
Collection and compilation of available secondary baseline data from
different sources; and
Categorisation of Project as per IFC guidelines.
4.1 SCREENING METHODOLOGY
For the screening exercise, ERM undertook discussions with, both, the
OUWPPL and Suzlon team and a review of the documents available. The
following sub sections provide an understanding of the methodology
followed.
4.1.1 Kick-off Meeting
The ERM team had a brief kick-off meeting with the OUWPPL team prior to
site reconnaissance visit. A discussion was also held with regard to the
expectations from this assessment in terms of scope of work, deliverables,
timeline and the methodology to be followed for the same.
4.1.2 Document Review
Desk based review of the relevant documents of the project site and its
surroundings were carried out to have a clear understanding of the Project
and its impacts. Following documents were made available for review as part
of ESIA:
Co-ordinates of all the 48 WTGs and;
Various documents for the Project;
A review of the secondary information available on the project area, the
administrative block, the district and the state was undertaken so as to allow
for the primary data to be substantiated and complimented.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
57
4.2 PROJECT CATEGORISATION
4.2.1 Equator Principles Financial Institutions (EFPI) and International
Performance Standards (IFC)
Equator Principles Financial Institutions (EFPIs) are required to categorise
projects according to the magnitude of its potential impacts based on the
environmental and social screening criteria of the International Performance
Standards (IFC) as per the following understanding:
Category A: Projects with potential significant adverse social or
environmental impacts that are diverse, irreversible or unprecedented;
Category B: Projects with potential limited adverse social or
environmental impacts that are few in number, site-specific, largely
reversible, and readily addressed through mitigation measures; or
Category C: Projects with minimal or no adverse social or environmental
impacts.
With reference to the IFC’s environmental and social screening criteria, it is
anticipated that the proposed Project will fall under ‘Category B’ for the
following reasons:
Environmental and impacts of the project are anticipated during the
construction phase will encompass in increase noise & vibration and air
quality during the site preparation including setting and operation of
batching plants, labour camps, excavations for WTGs, Transmission Line
Towers, vehicular transport, Impact on terrestrial ecology in and around
WTG’s; Internal and external transmission line towers, pooling substations
etc.;
The project does not involve any involuntary resettlement as only private
farmlands have been purchased for the project. Also most of the land
sellers are semi-medium to medium farmers and no one reportedly has
been rendered landless due to the project;
The census record reports only a minor presence of Scheduled Tribe
population within the project footprint area and as reported by Suzlon
management no land has been purchased from any marginalised
communities. The project also does not fall under Schedule V area;
There could be potential livelihood losses for vulnerable communities in
the area whose primary occupation is agricultural labour due to the
cumulative effect of farmland sales in the study area. However, this could
be mitigated with targeted and appropriate CSR interventions;
The study area is surrounded by numerous wind farms and more
windfarms are anticipated to be developed around the Project Area.
Therefore, this project could also add to the cumulative impacts of
increased traffic in the area owing to people and materials movement for
the O&M phase of the existing wind farm projects and for the construction
of new wind farm projects. This could be mitigated by appropriate traffic
management in the Project Area.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
58
No significant cultural heritage sites are located in the project area and
therefore no impact on any local cultural properties is anticipated due to
the project activities;
During the construction phase, there will be site-specific reversible
impacts to Endangered and Near Threatened mammals and birds in the
area. However, the project is not anticipated to lead to a reduction in the
population of the Endangered and Near Threatened species or a loss in
area of the habitat concerned, such that the persistence of a viable and
representative host ecosystem is compromised; and
During the operation phase, there will be site-specific adverse irreversible
impacts to birds and bats from operating wind turbine blades and the
electrical transmission infrastructure. Once, the project is decommissioned,
the impacts will be non-existent and all else being equal, the status of birds
and bats will revert to the pre-project baseline.
4.3 SCOPING METHODOLOGY
Scoping has been undertaken to identify the potential Area of Influence for the
Project (and thus the appropriate Study Area), to identify potential
interactions between the Project and resources/receptors in the Area of
Influence and the impacts that could result from these interactions, and to
prioritize these impacts in terms of their likely significance. It is to be noted
here that during the period of ESIA study, Project is in the Planning and Pre-
Construction phase, therefore, the scoping exercise includes all the phases of
the project, i.e., planning and pre-construction, construction, operation and
maintenance and decommissioning into consideration.
The scoping exercise was undertaken on the basis of the information available
on the project, the discussions with the Project team and the prior
understanding of ERM of wind power projects. Potential impacts have been
identified through a systematic process whereby the features and activities
(both planned and unplanned) associated with the construction, operation and
maintenance and decommissioning phases of the Project have been
considered with respect to their potential to interact with resources/
receptors. However, social impacts are assessed retrospectively for the land
purchase process during preconstruction phase. Potential impacts have each
been classified in one of three categories:
No interaction: where the Project is unlikely to interact with the resource/
receptor (e.g., wholly terrestrial projects may have no interaction with the
marine environment);
Interaction likely, but not likely to be significant: where there is likely to
be an interaction, but the resultant impact is unlikely to change baseline
conditions in an appreciable/detectable way; and
Significant interaction: where there is likely to be an interaction, and the
resultant impact has a reasonable potential to cause a significant effect on
the resource/receptor.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
59
As a tool for conducting scoping, the various Project features and activities
that could reasonably act as a source of impact were identified, and these have
been listed down the vertical axis of a Potential Interactions Matrix. The
resources/receptors relevant to the Baseline environment have been listed
across the horizontal axis of the matrix.
Each resulting cell on the Potential Interactions Matrix thus represents a
potential interaction between a Project feature/activity and a resource/
receptor.
The under construction wind power Project will involve the following key
activities during its life cycle which will include planning/ pre-construction,
construction, operation and maintenance and decommissioning phases and
the same has been detailed in Section 2.
4.4 SCOPING RESULTS
The completed potential interactions matrix for Project activities and likely
impacted resources/ receptors is presented in Table 4.1. Those cells that are
coloured ‘white’ are ‘scoped out’ for further consideration in the ESIA Process.
Those interactions that are ‘grey’ are also ‘scoped out’, but the ESIA report
includes a discussion that presents the evidence base (e.g., past experience,
documented data, etc.) used to justify the basis upon which this decision was
made. Those interactions that are shaded ‘black’ are retained for further
consideration in the ESIA Process.
Interactions that are likely to lead to significant impacts are presented in Table
4.2 and will be the focus of the impact assessment. Owing to site conditions
there are certain possible interactions that will not take place. As a result these
interactions have been “scoped out” and are presented in Table 4.3.
4.4.1 Cumulative Impacts
It was observed during site reconnaissance survey, that existing wind farms,
managed by Suzlon, are present in the Project area especially towards the
south and east of the Project. Wind Farms are known to present in the villages
of Venkatadri Palli, approximately 0.7 km south of BLG-086, approximately
1.9 km east of WTG BLG-085, approximately 2.4- 3 km east of WTGs BLG-155
to BLG 163, which could lead to some environmental, social and ecological
cumulative impacts. Cumulative impacts have been elucidated, further in
Chapter 7 of the report.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
60
Table 4.1 Potential interactions matrix for the 100.8 MW Project, near the village of Beluguppa.
Environmental and Social
Resources/ Receptors
Project Phase and Activity
La
nd
use
So
il Q
ua
lity
an
d L
and
En
vir
on
me
nt
Wa
ter
En
vir
on
me
nt
Am
bie
nt
Air
Qu
ali
ty
Vis
ua
l L
an
dsc
ap
e
Am
bie
nt
No
ise
Le
ve
ls
Eco
log
y
Occ
up
ati
on
al
Hea
lth
an
d S
afe
ty
De
mo
gra
ph
y (
In
flu
x a
nd
D
isp
lace
me
nt
Lo
cal
Eco
no
my
an
d E
mp
loy
me
nt
Na
tura
l /C
om
mo
n P
rop
ert
y
Re
sou
rce
s
La
nd
ba
sed
Liv
eli
ho
od
s
Co
mm
un
ity
He
alt
h a
nd
Sa
fety
So
cia
l In
fra
stru
ctu
re a
nd
Se
rvic
es
Cu
ltu
re a
nd
he
rita
ge
Planning Phase
Wind Master/ Meteorological Master Installation
Design and Finalization of Contractors
Land acquisition
Construction Phase
Pathways and access road construction
WTG location preparation – site clearance
Construction material transport and storage
Labour camp
Mobilization of Construction machinery
Mobilizing and operating DG sets
Establishment of Batching Plant
Foundation excavation and construction
Transportation of WTG components to site
WTG parts and other equipment – transit storage yards
Office building construction
Transmission line – Pole laying and line installation
Internal electric connections
Wind farm commissioning
Operation and Maintenance Phase
Normal operation of windfarm
Routine inspection and maintenance scheduled activities at each WTG location
Operation and maintenance of ancillary facilities such as yards, stores.
Inspection, maintenance and operation of transmission lines
Inspection, maintenance and operation of intra-site pathways/access roads
Structural Failure of WTG due to Natural Hazard like cyclone, earthquake.
Decommissioning Phase
Remove WTG parts and ancillary facilities
Remove transmission lines
Return intra-site access roads
Restoration of wind farm site land
= Represents “no” interactions is reasonably expected
= Represents interactions reasonably possible but none of the outcome will lead to significant impact
= Represents interactions reasonably possible with one of the outcomes may lead to potential significant impacts
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
61
Table 4.2 Interactions identified that are likely to result in significant impacts
Interaction
(between Project
Activity and
Resource/Receptor)
Justification for Expectation of Potentially Significant Impacts
Change in land use Construction of temporary structures – stockyard, batching
plant, and will change the land use for short period;
Clearing of vegetation for Project related activities;
Laying of transmission lines and towers, paving and widening
of access roads, erection of WTG towers and site office will lead
to permanent change in land use; and
Restoration of wind farm site after Project cycle will reverse the
land use to the original one.
Impacts on Land
and Soil
Environment
Decrease of soil quality due to loss of vegetation cover;
Higher soil evaporation and loss of soil moisture because of loss
of vegetation cover;
Impact on land environment because of widening and paving of
access/internal roads and laying of transmission lines;
Erosion of loose soil during monsoon season and windy periods;
Sedimentation of nearby water bodies due to excessive soil
erosion and run-off;
Compaction of soil due to foundation construction and heavy
traffic use;
Removal of top soil at WTGs, ancillary facilities and
transmission tower sites;
Generation of construction debris, solid municipal waste and
decommissioning waste;
Impact on soil and land environment due to improper
management of domestic solid waste generated;
Storage and handling of hazardous waste (e.g. fuel and
lubricant) and accidents/negligence leading to leaks and soil
contamination;
Generation of hazardous waste during operation of the Project
e.g. small amounts of waste oil; and
Restoration of wind farm site after Project cycle.
Impact on Water
Resources
Requirement of water for domestic and construction purposes
may put a stress on local water resources;
Impact on surface water quality due to run-off from storage
area during monsoon; and
Discharge of wastewater into water bodies.
Impact on air
quality
Fugitive dust emissions due to movement of machinery and
vehicles;
Dust emissions from operation of batching plant, excavation,
back-filling activities, etc.;
Decreased environmental resilience to air pollution because of
loss of forest vegetation; and
Air emissions due to operations of DG sets to be used for
emergency power backup and batching plant.
Visual Landscape The visual landscape of the study area will be altered due to the
WTGs and supporting facilities;
Presence of construction equipment during construction phase;
Decreased visual aesthetic of converting land atop the
mountains to open plains with scattered vegetation; and
Presence of internal and external transmission lines.
Increased Ambient
Noise Levels
Generation of noise during clearing of vegetation;
Noise generation due to movement of vehicles and heavy earth
moving machineries during construction phase;
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
62
Interaction
(between Project
Activity and
Resource/Receptor)
Justification for Expectation of Potentially Significant Impacts
Noise generation during excavation and drilling of rocky land
for WTGs;
Noise generation due to widening and paving of access roads;
Generation of noise during operation of batching plant and
from DG Sets;
Generation of noise due to operation of WTGs; and
Generation of noise while decommissioning the WTG
components and ancillary facilities at the end of the Project life
cycle.
Ecological
Impacts
Loss of habitat and resulting impact on flora & fauna due to
clearance of vegetation;
Disturbance due to increased anthropogenic presence and
activity due to construction activities;
Faunal mortality due to vehicular movement on roads;
Collision and mortality risk to avifauna and bats from
operating wind turbine blades; and
Collision and electrical hazards to birds from electrical
transmission infrastructure.
Occupational Health
and Safety
There is a likelihood of some risks to health and safety of workers.
Community Health
and Safety
Potential shadow flickering effect on the habituations located close to
the WTGs area;
The community living in the vicinity of the WTGs will be exposed to
risk of structure failure of WTGs.
Cumulative impact of increased traffic in the project area owing to
the many wind farm projects in the area.
Livelihood Job opportunities due to project, especially for unskilled and semi-
skilled laborers and security workers. But the major impact due to
employment opportunities is during the construction phase where
they have recruited locals for mainly unskilled jobs during
construction. Since the project is about to be operational, only few
locals may find employment as security staffs at the WTG locations.
Therefore the impact on the local economy due to employment
opportunity during the operation phase of the project is positive, but
negligible.
The diversion of the cultivable land for non-agricultural use will
reduce the availability of land for agricultural laborers in the area
may be affected due to reduced availability of land. This can have a
minor impact on the livelihoods of local agricultural laborers.
However, there might be a cumulative impact of livelihood loss for
agricultural laborers in the area owing to the numerous wind farm
projects in the area.
Land Sellers for the WTG locations have gained financially. But the
land purchase process had been completed during ERM site visit,
and no further individual economic impact is foreseen during the
operations phase of the project.
Social Development
through CSR
Suzlon and Orange have a robust corporate CSR team and have a
CSR personnel employed in their site location. Andhra Pradesh has a
CSR employee of Suzlon and 20 villages; 18 in Anantapur and 2 in
Cuddapah districts are being covered by Suzlon CSR. Orange too has
a CSR representative in the area and has reportedly undertaken CSR
activities in the other wind farm projects in the locat
Some of the CSR activities undertaken include provision of village
RO filters, Tree plantation, eye camp, water harvesting structures,
eye-camps, skill training for women, micro-enterprise initiative etc.
As part of this project, another 7-8 villages of Vidapanankallu
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
63
Interaction
(between Project
Activity and
Resource/Receptor)
Justification for Expectation of Potentially Significant Impacts
Mandal will also be brought under the CSR umbrella of Suzlon. CSR
initiatives, if effectively implemented can have a major impact on the
project area, which is one of the most backward districts in the state.
The Scoped- out interactions during the proposed Project's life cycle have been
elaborated in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3 Scoped- out interactions during the proposed Project's life cycle
SN. Impact Title Reason for Scoping-out
1 Impact on local
demographics
There is no significant influx of migrant workers during the
construction phase of the wind farm project, since most of the
unskilled and semi-skilled laborers have been sourced locally.
However, since the project was about to being operational,
there were no migrant workers on-site.
Wind farm projects also require very little manpower during
operations phase, therefore no significant influx of population
is expected.
2 Prevalence of
communicable
diseases
Since there are no significant migrant workers involved for
the project, the potential for introduction of communicable
disease due to outside labour in the area has been scoped out.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
64
5 ENVIRONMENTAL ECOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL BASELINE
Baseline refers to the physical, biological, cultural and human conditions that
will prevail in the absence of the project, including interactions amongst them.
Establishing baseline helps in understanding the prevailing environmental,
ecological and socio-economic status of the study area. It provides requisite
information of the biophysical and social environment for decision makers to
take appropriate measures regarding the project.
Establishing baseline provides the background environmental and social
conditions for prediction of the future environmental characteristics of the
area before setting up of the project. It also helps in environmental and social
management planning and provides a basis to finalize a strategy for
minimizing any potential impact due on surrounding environment due to
setting up of the project.
This section establishes the baseline environmental, ecological and socio-
economic status of the wind farm site and surrounding area to provide a
context within which the impacts of the wind farm project are to be assessed.
5.1 LOCATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE SETTING
5.2 AREA OF INFLUENCE
For the purpose of the baseline establishment and impact assessment, an Area
of Influence (AoI) has been identified. This sub section provides an
understanding of the AoI thus identified and the reasons for the same.
5.2.1 Study Area
The study area considered for ESIA includes an area within 5 km radius from
farthest of WTGs. The study area of 5 km has been selected based on the
location of Project site and its footprint, nature and spatial distribution of
potential social and environmental impacts (based on similar type of projects).
Project footprint Area
The Project Footprint is the area that may reasonably be expected to be
physically touched by Project activities, across all phases. Physically, there is
no demarcation or fencing for the Project Site boundary and hence it is
contiguous with the rest of the area.
The Project Footprint for Project includes land used for the erection of WTGs,
substation, storage of materials, site office, access roads, and internal and
external transmission lines.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
65
Project Area of Influence (AoI)
The effects of the Project and Project activities on a particular resource or
receptor will have spatial (distance) and temporal (time) dimensions, the scale
of which is dependent on a number of factors. These factors are incorporated
in the definition of the Project’s Area of Influence (AoI).
The AoI considered for the existing Project with respect to the environmental
and social resources was based on the following reach of impacts:
Environmental parameters: Project site boundary, immediate vicinity,
access road and surroundings, i.e. a study area of approximately 5 km
(hereafter referred to as the AoI) distance from project line has been
used to depict these parameters;
o Noise: Noise impact area (defined as the area over which an increase
in environmental noise levels due to the Project can be detected) –
typically 1 km from operations (this includes a distance of 10 times the
size of the rotor diameter of the WTG);
o Air Quality: Dust emissions, fugitive dust –typically up to 100 m from
Construction, operations and maintenance area;
o Land environment: The impacts on soil and land- typically up to 100
m from project foot print area;
o Ecological Environment (Terrestrial and Aquatic): This includes: (a)
the direct footprint of the project comprising the wind farm; (b) The
areas immediately adjacent to the project footprint within which a zone
of ecological disturbance is created through increased dust, human
presence and project related activities (e.g., trampling, transportation
activities).;
Social and Cultural: the AoI for the project is identified as the area within
a 5 km radius from the project footprint area, comprising of approximately
10 villages.
Core and Buffer Zone
This AoI is in turn, divided into a core and buffer zone. This division of the
AoI into two zones is based on the understanding that the majority of the
impacts from the project (during the mobilization, construction, operations
and decommission phase) would be contained within a 1 km radius from the
Project Footprint in terms of spread and intensity, with the buffer zone
appearing to have limited interaction with the project.
The physical feature map of the Project has been presented in Figure 5.1
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
66
Figure 5.1 Physical feature map of the Project AoI
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
67
5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE METHODOLOGY
The following sub sections provide an understanding of the methodology
followed for the establishment of the environmental baseline.
As mentioned in the earlier sections, ERM undertook a site visit between the
3rd of May to the 7th of May, 2016 to understand the site setting, environmental
and social sensitivities and to identify the relevant local stakeholders. The site
visit included a walkover of the site and associated facilities with the
OUWPPL and Suzlon teams. Limited consultation with the local community,
local community representatives, local NGOs and local government officials
was conducted to understand the local environmental and social issues in the
area and to receive feedback from stakeholder on these issues. A
reconnaissance survey using available recent satellite imagery of the study
area around the Project was initially conducted to identify environmental and
social sensitive receptors located within the study area.
As part of this site visit, primary data was collected from sensitive spots and
other places inside the AoI and concerned government departments and other
relevant agencies were also contacted in order to obtain information. The
following sub sections provide an understanding of the same.
Primary Baseline Data Collection
Kiwis Eco Laboratories Pvt. Ltd, recognized by Ministry of Environment,
Forests and Climate Change, Government of India was engaged for collection
of baseline information on ambient noise quality between the 5th of May to
the 15th of May, 2016. The primary baseline data was collected for aspects
detailed out in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1 Primary Baseline Data Collection
S.N. Environmental Attribute No. of
Locations/Ar
ea
Frequency Remarks
1 Ambient Air Quality 2 Twice a week for
One Week at
two
locations
Air Quakity at neaby
villages were
monitored twice a
week for one week at
two (2) locations.
2 Ambient Noise Quality
8 Once during the
monitoring
period
Noise levels were
monitored on hourly
basis for 24 hours at
six (8) locations.
3 Water Quality 1 Surface
Water and 3
Ground
Water
Once during the
monitoring
period
To assess water
quality in the Project
Area. One (1) surface
water and three (3)
ground water
samples, from hand
pumps, from nearby
villages.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
68
Secondary Baseline Data Collection
Secondary baseline data collection involved identifying and collecting existing
published materials and documents. Information on various environment
aspects (like geology, hydrology, drainage pattern, ecology etc.), meteorology
and socio economic aspects were collected from different institutions,
government offices and literatures etc. Secondary data was collected for the
aspects as given in Table 5.2.
Table 5.2 Secondary Baseline Data Collection
S. N. Attribute Source of Data Collection
1 Meteorological data India Meteorological Department (IMD)
2 Geology, geomorphology,
hydrogeology and hydrology
Geological Survey of India (GSI) and State Ground
Water Board
3 Land use Through Satellite Imageries
4 Natural Hazards Building Materials and Technology
Promotion Council of India (BMTPC)
Meteorological Department
Environmental and social baseline data was collected through primary
surveys as well as through secondary sources by literature survey and
discussions with the concerned departments/agencies. Details of data
collected are summarized in subsequent sections.
5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE FINDINGS
5.4.1 Land cover and use
The land use of the Project AoI comprises primarily of agricultural land which
covers approximately 84.84% of the Project area. The Project AOI also
comprises of wasteland which covers approximately 7.34 % of the area. The
built-up area comprises of approximately 1.75% of the area. Waterbodies
comprise of approximately 2.62 % of the area. The land use statistics have
been elaborated upon in detail in Table 5.3 and a map detailing the land use/
land cover has been provided in Figure 5.2.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
69
Table 5.3 Land use break detail of the Project
Level –I Level –II Level –III Area (Sq. km) % of Geographical Area
Built up Built-up Rural Settlement 5.59 1.75
Sub- Total 5.59 1.75
Agricultural Land Cropland Kharif Crop 49.76 15.63
Rabi Crop 154.80 48.62
Double Crop (Kh +
Ra) 20.38 6.40
Fallow Land Current Fallow 36.26 11.39
Salt affected land
Salt affected land-
Moderate 8.94 2.81
Sub- Total 270.12 84.84
Wasteland
Wastelands-Scrub
land Rocky/Stony 0.48 0.15
Land with Open scrub 22.29 7.00
Shallow Ravines 0.64 0.20
Sub- Total 23.41 7.35
Forest Deciduous Forest
Deciduous Forest-
Open 3.69 1.16
Scrub Forest Scrub Forest 7.26 2.28
Sub- Total 10.95 3.44
Water bodies Waterbody
Waterbodies-Kharif
Extent 0.22 0.07
Waterbodies-Rabi
Extent 1.39 0.44
Waterbodies-Dry 2.59 0.81
Waterbodies-
River/Stream-Dry 4.14 1.30
Sub- Total 8.34 2.62
Total 318.41 100.00
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
70
Figure 5.2 Land use in the Project AoI
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
71
5.4.2 Local Topographical Features
The local topographical features across the study area comprise of flat terrain.
Areas that comprise of village settlements and other human activities are
generally flat and have been conditioned over time to support agricultural
activities. Hilly terrain has also been observed during the site visit towards the
south-south west of the WTGs. The WTG locations are located on terrain that
is a primarily flat terrain. The WTG locations have base elevations ranging
from 440-500 metres above mean sea level (MSL). The contour map as well as
the digital elevation (DEM) of the Project AoI is presented in Figure 5.3 and
Figure 5.4.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
72
Figure 5.3 Contour Map of the Project AoI
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
73
Figure 5.4 Digital Elevation Map of the Project AoI
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
74
5.4.3 Geology and Hydrogeology
According to the Department of Mines and Geology,-Andhra Pradesh, the
lithology of the Anantapur district comprises of three rock groups. They are as
follows
(i) Middle Proterozoic age rocks which leads to the Cudappah
Supergroup of rocks comprising of the Paraghni group, the
Chitravati group and the Kurnool group. Major rock types
comprise of quartzite, shale, limestone and their conglomerates.
The ground water prospects in areas that comprise these rocks are
limited, discontinuous and with less yield potential;
(ii) Archaen rock types which comprises of peninsular gneiss complex.
The rock types encountered are granite, hornblende, gneiss and
migmatite. Ground water prospects are primarily confined to the
floors hills and forests; and
(iii) Archaean Lower Proterozoic rock types which comprises of
closepet granite, Dharwad supergroup and peninsular gneiss
complex. The lithology in this region is primarily granite, quartzite
schist and a blend of granite, horneblend, gneiss and migmatite.
The ground water prospects are primarily weathered and fractured
aquifiersupto 100 m extending beyond 150 m and suitable for
borewells.
The project falls in (iii) that comprises of granite, horneblend, gneiss and
migmatite. The area that the project falls in utilises water for agriculture
primarily with the help of borewells. However, the trend of ground water has
been decreasing every year. As per the data in the Central Ground water
brochure for the District of Anantapur, the mandal of Beluguppa, in which the
project lies in, has been classified as over exploited (1) . Water is supplemented
to the region via a network of canals with water sourced from the PABR Dam,
which is located towards the north north east of the Project AoI (i.e.
approximately 9 km away).
(1) Ground water brochure, Anantapur District, Andhra Pradesh. Central Ground Water Board. Southern region,
Hyderabad, September 2013. http://cgwb.gov.in/District_Profile/AP/Ananthapur.pdf. Accessed on 04/07/2016.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
75
Figure 5.5 Geological and Hydrogeological map of Anantapur District
Source: Ground water brochure, Anantapur District, Andhra Pradesh. Central Ground Water Board. Southern region, Hyderabad, September 2013.
Project
Site
Pro
Site
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
76
5.4.4 Hydrology and Drainage Pattern
The drainage pattern in the project AoI is supplemented by three major
sources of water, which is a source of surface water in the Project AoI, viz. the
Kanekallu Tank, which is located approximately 4.54 km north of WTG BLG-
014 is a seasonal in nature and is recharged with rain water during the
monsoon period. Similar water bodies have been observed approximately 2
km west of WTG BLG-011, approximately 3-4 km west of BLG-007,
approximately 2 km west of BLG-080 and BLG-081, approximately 2.1 km east
of BLG-025. The Jeedipalli Reservoir is located to the north-west of the Project
and is located approximately 5.07 east of the closest WTG, i.e. WTG BLG-163.
Examples of water bodies that were observed in the Project Area at the time of
the ERM site visit, in June, 2016 have been presented in Figure 5.6. The
Ahobilam/ PABR Dam (Figure 5.7) is present approximately 10 km north east
of the Project AoI and plays a major role in suplementing thevillages in the
east of the Project Area with water for domestic purposes as well as for
farming activities. Water is transported via a canal system to the villages as
observed in the drainage map in Figure 5.8.
Figure 5.6 Waterbodies observed in the Project AoI at the time of the ERM site visit (a)
Jeedipalli Reservoir (b) Dried up Kanekallu Tank.
Source: ERM site visit, May2016
Figure 5.7 Ahobilam/ PABR Dam located approximately 10 km north east of the Project
Source: ERM site visit, May2016
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
77
Figure 5.8 Drainage Map of the Project AoI
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
78
5.4.5 Climate and Meteorology
Regional Meteorology
The climate of the region is classified as tropical wet and dry climate with
following four main seasons:
Winter season : November to February
Pre-monsoon season : March to May
Monsoon season : June to September
Post Monsoon season : October to November
The long term meteorology (period 1961- 1990) of the region based on data
recorded at the nearest observatory station of India Meteorological
Department (IMD) at Anantapur is presented in Table 5.4 and Table 5.5and
described in subsequent sections.
Table 5.4 Climatological Data, Anantapur
Months Temperature (°C) % Relative
Humidity
Rainfall (mm) Vapour
Pressure,
hPa
Wind
Speed
kmph
Daily
Max
Daily
Min
Highest
in the
month
Lowest
in the
month
0830
hrs
1730
hrs
Monthl
y Total
No. of
rainy
days
0830
hrs
1730
hrs
Mean
January 30.3 17.3 32.8 13.9 68 40 0.3 0.0 17.3 15.5 8.8
February 33.6 19.5 36.5 16.0 59 31 1.0 0.1 17.3 14.8 9.1
March 37.0 22.6 39.4 18.5 53 25 5.2 0.4 18.7 14.7 9.0
April 39.0 26.0 41.2 22.2 56 26 14.6 1.2 23.2 16.5 9.2
May 38.8 26.2 41.3 22.2 62 32 52.5 2.8 25.3 19.5 12.2
June 35.4 25.0 38.9 22.5 68 47 51.8 3.3 25.2 23.0 16.4
July 33.5 24.3 36.5 22.4 72 54 69.2 4.1 25.1 23.8 16.5
August 32.9 23.8 35.7 22.3 74 55 70.2 4.7 24.9 23.9 15.7
September 32.8 23.5 35.7 21.5 76 55 135.1 7.2 25.4 23.9 10.8
October 31.8 22.5 34.3 19.0 74 56 101.1 6.0 24.6 22.8 7.4
November 30.0 20.2 32.4 15.5 74 55 39.3 2.4 21.8 20.3 8.2
December 29.0 18.1 31.2 14.0 74 50 11.0 0.8 19.5 18.0 9.0
Average 33.7 22.4 36.325 19.17 68 43.83 22.4 19.7 11.02
Total 551.3 33.0 Source: Climatological Table 1961-90, India Meteorological Department
Temperature
As per the data recorded at meteorological station, Anantapur, the
temperature begins to increase from January till May. April and May are the
hottest months with highest temperature of 41.3°C recorded in the month of
May. The lowest temperature of 13.9°C was recorded in month of January.
The daily mean minimum temperature varies from 17.3°C in January to 26.2°C
in May, whereas the daily mean maximum temperature varies from 29°C in
December to 39°C in April.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
79
Relative Humidity
The relative humidity is generally high during the period of monsoon from
July to September. On an average, relative humidity is about 74% during
morning hours and 54.6% during evening hours during monsoon. The
minimum humidity of 25% is recorded in March and maximum relative
humidity of 76% is experienced in September.
Rainfall
The annual average rainfall in the region is about 551.3 mm spreading over 33
days. The southwest monsoon sets in the end of May and attains the highest
intensity in month of September. The monsoon withdraws towards the end of
the October contributing about 18.3% of the annual average rainfall i.e., about
101.1 mm. The remaining months of year also experience the sporadic rains.
The maximum rainfall occurs during month of September (135.1 mm) and
minimum during the month of January (0.3 mm).
Wind Speed and Direction
The normal wind speed range in the region is 8.2- 16.5 kmph which prevails
during 50% of each month. The predominant wind direction is recorded to be
from W/ SW during the summer (March-May) and monsoon season (June –
September). Post monsoon (October- November) receives wind
predominantly from N/ NE/E and winter season (December – February)
experiences calm conditions during most of the time. Monthly pre-dominant
wind directions during morning and evening time have been presented in
Table 5.5.
Table 5.5 Predominant Wind Direction
Month Morning Time Predominant Winds Evening Time Predominant Winds
I II III I II III
January CALM E SE E NE CALM
February CALM E SE E NE CALM
March CALM SW W E NE CALM
April W SW CALM CALM NE E
May W SW NW & CALM CALM W&NW N&NE
June W SW NW W SW NW
July W SW CALM W SW NW
August W SW NW W NW SW
September W CALM SW W NW & CALM SW&NE
October CALM W E NE E CALM
November CALM E NE E NE CALM
December CALM E NE E NE CALM Source: Climatological tables 1961-1990, India Meteorological Department
5.4.6 Natural Hazards
Seismicity
As per the data released by the Building Materials & Technology Promotion
Council (BMTPC) of Government of India, the Project is located in an area that
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
80
is designated as Zone II that corresponds to MSK VI or less. This zone is a
zone of low damage risk. The Earthquake Hazard Map (showing faults,
thrusts and earthquakes) is presented in Figure 5.9.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
81
Figure 5.9 Earthquake Hazard Map of the District of Anantapur
Source: Building Material and technology Promotion Council (BMTPC)
Project Site Pr
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
82
Wind and Cyclones
As per the data released by the Building Materials & Technology Promotion
Council (BMTPC) of Government of India, the Project site is located in a an
area that experiences low wind velocities and therefore in a n area of low
damage risk zone (Vb= 33 m/s). The Wind Cyclone and Hazard Map are
presented in Figure 5.10.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
83
Figure 5.10 Wind and Cyclone Hazard Map of the District of Anantapur
Source: Building Material and technology Promotion Council (BMTPC)
Project Site Pr
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
84
Floods
As per the data released by the prepared by Building Materials & Technology
Promotion Council (BMTPC) of Government of India, the project site falls in
an area not liable to floods. The flood hazard map of the district of Anantapur
has been presented in Figure 5.11.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
85
Figure 5.11 Flood Hazard Map of the District of Anantapur
Source: Building Material and technology Promotion Council (BMTPC)
Project Site Pr
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
86
5.4.7 Ambient Air Quality
The existing ambient air quality of the study area was monitored at two
locations during the monitoring period. The monitoring parameters includes
Respirable Particulate Matter (RPM) i.e. PM10 (particulate matter of particle
size less than 10 micrometer) and PM2.5 (particulate matter of particle size less
than 2.5 micrometer), Sulphur Dioxide (SO2), Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) and
Carbon Monoxide (CO). PM10, PM2.5, SO2 and NOx were monitored on 24-
hourly basis while CO was monitored on eight hourly basis monitored twice a
week during the study period.
Selection of sampling locations
The baseline status of the ambient air quality has been established through
ambient air quality monitoring network and is based on the following
considerations:
Meteorological conditions of the area based on information of IMD;
Topography of the study area; and
Location of sensitive receptors such as major settlements.
The details of monitoring locations within the study area are presented in
Table 5.6. Map showing location of ambient air quality monitoring stations is
presented in Figure 5.12.
The sampling and analysis of ambient air quality parameters was carried out
as per the procedures detailed in relevant Parts of IS-5182 (Indian Standards
for Ambient Air Quality Parameters). The applied testing procedures are
given in brief in Table 5.7.
Table 5.6 Details of Ambient Air Monitoring Stations
S
N.
Sampli
ng
Locatio
ns
Loca
tion
Cod
e
Zone Easting
(mE)
Northin
g (mN)
Justification for Selection of Location
and its setting
1 Avulen
na
Village
AA
Q1
43 P 723235.00 1630408.
00
This station’s AAQ data captures the
baseline for settlements at the nearest
village of Avulenna to the WTGs
(which are located towards the south
of AAQ2)
2 Sri
Rangap
uram
Village
AA
Q2
43 P 730947.00 1624088.
00
This station’s AAQ data captures the
baseline for settlements at the nearest
village of Sri Rangapuram to the WTGs
(which are located towards the north of
AAQ1)
Source: ERM site visit, May2016
Note: The Coordinates have been presented in the UTM Format
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
87
Figure 5.12 Map showing the location of ambient air quality (AAQ) stations in the Project AoI
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
88
Table 5.7 Details of Methods and Detection Limits for different Air Quality Parameters
S.N. Parameter Range/Detection Limit
1. Particulate Matter (size less than 10 µm) or PM10
IS-5182 (PART-23):2006 & CPCB Guidelines Volume 1 (2012-2013)
2. Particulate Matter (size less than 2.5 µm) or PM2.5
Guidelines Volume 1 (2012-2013)
3. Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) IS-5182 (Part-II):2001
4. Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) IS-5182 (Part-VI): 2006
5. Carbon Monoxide (CO) CO Analyzer
Source: ERM site visit, May2016
Summarized AAQ results as monitored at various locations are presented in
Table 5.8. The ambient Air quality results have been provided in Annex D.
Table 5.8 Ambient Air Quality in the Study Area
Parameter Units Observed AAQ1 AAQ2
PM10
µg/m3 Maximum 65.3 63.9
Minimum 64.1 62.6
Average 64.7 63.25
NAAQS Standard 100 100
PM2.5
µg/m3 Maximum 26.1 25.5
Minimum 25.6 24.9
Average 25.8 25.2
NAAQS Standard 60 60
SO2 µg/m3 Maximum 16.2 15.9
Minimum 15.8 15.2
Average 16.0 15.5
NAAQS Standard 80 80
NOx
µg/m3 Maximum 19.8 19.1
Minimum 19.2 18.7
Average 19.5 18.9
NAAQS Standard 80 80
CO
mg/m3 Maximum 0.1 0.1 Minimum 0.1 0.1 Average 0.1 0.1 NAAQS Standard 02 02
Note: NAAQS = Revised National Ambient Air Quality Standard as
notified on 16 November 2009.
Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10)
As per NAAQS, the prescribed limit of RPM i.e. PM10 for 24 hours monitoring
is 100 µg/m3 and WHO guidelines for PM10 is 50 µg/m3. The maximum PM10
values were observed to be within the NAAQS limit, however found to exceed
the WHO limits at both the locations. The graphical representation of PM10
concentration in the study area is shown in Figure 5.13.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
89
Figure 5.13 PM10 Concentration in the Study Area
Source: Primary baseline data
Respirable Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
The average RPM concentration (PM2.5) values at the locations were found to
be between 25.8 µg/m3and 25.2 µg/26.028 µg/m3 respectively.
As per NAAQS and WHO, the prescribed limit of RPM i.e. PM2.5 for 24 hours
monitoring is 60µg/m3 and 25µg/m3 respectively. The average PM2.5values
were observed to be within the NAAQS limits, however found to exceed
WHO limit marginally. The graphical representation of PM2.5 concentration in
the study area is shown in Figure 5.14.
Figure 5.14 PM2.5 Concentration in the Study Area
Source: Primary baseline data
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
90
Sulphur dioxide (SO2)
The average SO2 concentration observed at the locations during the study
period was observed to be between 16 µg/m3 and 15.5 µg/m3 respectively.
The NAAQS and WHO guidelines for SO2 (24 hours monitoring) is 80
µg/m3and 20 µg/m3. The average SO2 values were observed to be within the
NAAQS and WHO limit at both locations. The graphical representation of SO2
concentration in the study area is shown in Figure 5.15.
Figure 5.15 SO2 Concentration in the Study Area
Source: Primary baseline data
Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx)
The average NOx concentration observed during the period was between 19.5 µg/m3 and 18.8 µg/m3 at each location respectively.
As per NAAQS the prescribed limit of NOx for 24 hours monitoring is
80µg/m3, whereas, WHO guidelines do not specify NOx limits for 24 hours
(annual limits are 40 µg/m3). The average NOx values were observed to be
within the NAAQS limit at both locations. The graphical representation of
NOx concentration in the study area is shown in Figure 5.16.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
91
Figure 5.16 NOx Concentration in the Study Area
Source: Primary baseline data
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
As per NAAQS the prescribed limit of CO for 8 hours monitoring is 2 mg/m3.
The average CO values were observed to be within the NAAQS limit at all the
locations as the observed values are below the detectable limit. WHO
guidelines do not specify limits for CO.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
92
5.4.8 Noise Quality
Noise levels were recorded at eight locations (Figure 5.17) once during the
study period with the aid of a digital noise level meter. Noise levels were
recorded for 24 hours and the noise quality has been reported as Leqday and
Leqnight for each of the locations. Daytime is considered from 0600 to 2200 hours
and night from 2200 to 0600 hours. The details of noise monitoring locations
are given in Table 5.9. The noise level in the study area is detailed in Table
5.10 . The results of noise quality are presented in Annex E.
Table 5.9 Details of Noise Sampling Locations
SN. Sampling
Locations
Location Code Zone Easting (mE) Northing (mN)
1 NQ1 Srirangapuram
Village
43 P 723235.00 1630407.00
2 NQ2 Nakkalapalli
Village
43 P 726249.00 1628843.00
3 NQ3 Beluguppa
Tanda Village
43 P 728518.00 1626985.00
4 NQ4 Avulenna
Village
43 P 730947.00 1624087.00
5 NQ5 Belaguppa
Village
43 P 737253.97 1628756.92
6 NQ6 Erragudi
Kottala Village
43 P 733106.58 1626301.88
7 NQ7 Tagguparthy
Village
43 P 730143.00 1627942.00
8 NQ8 Erragudi
Kottala Village
43 P 732148.42 1626553.18
Note: The Coordinates have been presented in the UTM Format
Table 5.10 Noise Level in the Study Area
S\N
.
Location
Equivalent Noise Levels Day Time
(dBA)
Equivalent Noise Level Night Time
(dBA)
Leq day Lmax Lmin
CPCB and
WHO
limits* Leq Leq night Lmax Lmin
CPCB and
WHO limits
Leq
1 NQ1 53.7 54.4 48.5 55 44.5 44.7 43.1 45
2 NQ 2 52.1 54.4 45.2 55 43.6 44.1 42.2 45
3 NQ 3 52.3 54.2 45.2 55 43.8 44.5 44.2 45
4 NQ 4 53.1 54.6 46.1 55 44.2 44.7 42.9 45
5 NQ 5 53.1 54.5 46.8 55 44.0 43.9 44.3 45 6 NQ 6 52.3 54.6 45.2 55 43.7 45.3 42.9 45 7 NQ 7 53.8 54.6 48.7 55 44.0 47.2 43.3 45 8 NQ 8 53.1 54.2 45.6 55 43.8 45.2 42.4 45 * Note: As per CPCB, Day time is considered from 6 am to 10 pm and night time is considered from 10 pm
to 6am;As per WHO limits, Day time is considered from 07.00 to 22.00 and night time is considered from
22.00 to 07.00.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
93
Figure 5.17 Map showing the location of Noise quality (NQ) stations in the Project AoI
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
94
The equivalent ambient noise level for day time (Leq day) and night time (Leq
night) at the eight monitoring locations were observed to be within the
corresponding prescribed limits of CPCB and WHO for residential areas. The
study area has primarily a rural setting where the major source of noise is
observed as vehicular noise.
The Daytime and night time noise levels recorded at various sampling
locations are presented in Figure 5.18 and Figure 5.19.
Figure 5.18 Day Time Noise Levels
Source: Primary baseline data
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
95
Figure 5.19 Night Time Noise Levels
Source: Primary baseline data
5.4.9 Water Quality
Surface water and Ground water quality
The water quality assessment was done to understand the baseline water
(surface water and ground water) quality of the study area. The groundwater
samples were collected from hand pumps/bore wells. Surface water samples
were collected from streams and dams within the project area of influence.
Map showing location of water sampling is presented in Figure 5.20. The
details of water sampling locations are presented in Table 5.11 .
The results of ground water and surface water are presented in Annex F and
Annex G.
Table 5.11 Details of Water Sampling Locations
S.N Location Station
Code
Zone Easting
(mE)
Northing
(mN)
Type of
Sample
Justification for
Location of
Sample
Surface water
1 J.D Palli
Reservoir
(outskirts of
Ankampalli
Village)
SW1 43 P 742842.91 1627320.70 Reservoir Water sample
collected the
reservoir
outskirts of the
village of
Ankampalli
utilised for
domestic
purposes
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
96
S.N Location Station
Code
Zone Easting
(mE)
Northing
(mN)
Type of
Sample
Justification for
Location of
Sample
Ground water
1 Sri
Rangapuram
Village
GW1 43 P 723210.82 1630676.99 Ground
water
(hand
pump)
Water sample
considered as the
representative
sample of the
ground water in
and around the
village of Sri
Rangapuram and
the water is being
used for washing,
drinking etc. This
was collected
from a hand
pump.
2. Tagguparthy
Village
GW2 43 P 737289.49 1628765.88 Ground
water
(hand
pump)
Water sample
considered as the
representative
sample of the
ground water in
and around the
village of
Tagguparthyand
the water is being
used for washing,
drinking etc. This
was collected
from a hand
pump.
3. Erragudi
Kottala
Village
GW3 43 P 732524.60 1626413.59 Ground
water
(hand
pump)
Water sample
considered as the
representative
sample of the
ground water in
and around the
village of
Erragudi Kottala
and the water is
being used for
washing,
drinking etc. This
was collected
from a hand
pump.
Note: The Coordinates have been presented in the UTM Format
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
97
Figure 5.20 Map showing the locations for surface water and ground water locations in the Project AoI
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
98
Parameters for analysis of water quality were selected based on the utility of
the particular source of water as per MoEFCC guidelines. The quality of
groundwater was compared with IS: 10500 for drinking purposes. Grab water
samples were collected from locations in a 5 litre sampling bottles and 250 ml
sterilized clean glass/pet bottle for complete physio-chemical and
bacteriological tests respectively. The samples were analysed as per standard
procedure/method given in IS: 3025, IS: 1622 and Standard Method for
Examination of Water and Wastewater Ed.20, published jointly by APHA and
AWWA.
Surface water quality
The result of surface water quality monitoring at two locations are given in
Table 5.12. The surface water was compared with CPCB discharge standard
for aquatic resources which is given in Table 5.13.
Table 5.12 Surface Water Quality observed during the monitoring Period
S. N. Test Parameters Units Method SW1
1 Color CU APHA 2120 C
<5.0
2 pH @ 26.5oC - APHA 4500H+ B 8.23
3 Turbidity NTU APHA 2130 B <5.0
4 Oil & Grease mg/L APHA 5520 B <10
5 Electrical Conductivity APHA 2510 – B 1112.0
6 Total Dissolved solids mg/L APHA 2540 C 667.0
7 Total Suspended Solids mg/L APHA 2540 D 12.0
8 Alkalinity as CaCO3 mg/L APHA 2320 B 141.40
9 Hardness as CaCO3 mg/L APHA 2340 C 122.40
10 Calcium as Ca mg/L APHA 3500 Ca B 16.35
11 Magnesium as Mg mg/L APHA 3500-Mg B 19.82
12 Chlorides as Cl- mg/L APHA 4500 Cl-
C 120.81
13 Sulphates as SO4 mg/L APHA 4500 SO4
D 149.82
14 Nitrate as NO3 mg/L APHA 4500 NO3
B <1.0
15 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L APHA 4500 O - C 5.50
16 Fluoride as F mg/L APHA 4500F- D 1.18
17 Iron as Fe mg/L APHA 3500 Fe B <0.3
18 Lead as Pb mg/L APHA 3111 B <0.1
19 Manganese as Mn mg/L APHA 3111 B <0.5
20 Cadmium as Cd mg/L APHA 3111 B <0.1
21 Chromium as Cr mg/L APHA 3111 B <0.5
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
99
S. N. Test Parameters Units Method SW1
22 Zinc as Zn mg/L APHA 3111 B <0.2
23 Chemical Oxygen
Demand
mg/L APHA 5220 B 17.28
24 Copper as Cu mg/L APHA 3111 B 0.2
25 Phosphorus as P mg/L APHA 4500 PC <1.0
26
Biochemical Oxygen
Demand
(3 Days at 27OC)
mg/L IS : 3025 (P-44) <4.0
27 Salinity* mg/L APHA 2520,B 218.24
28 Cyanide as CN-* mg/L
APHA 4500 CN-
C, E <0.05
29 Phenolic Compounds as
Phenols* mg/L APHA 5530 D <0.001
30 Total Coliform* MPN/100ml APHA 9221B Absent
31 Faecal Coliform* MPN/100ml APHA 9221 B Absent
32 Mercury as Hg* mg/L APHA 3112 B <0.001
Source: Primary baseline data
Table 5.13 Primary Water Quality Criteria for Designated-Best-Use-Classes
Source: CPCB
As per the CPCB primary water quality criteria for the surface water resources
are falls under Category C.
Designated-Best-
Use Category Criteria Description
Drinking
Water Source
without
conventional
treatment but after
disinfection
A Total Coliforms Organism MPN/100ml shall be 50 or less
pH between 6.5 and 8.5
Dissolved Oxygen 6mg/l or more
Biochemical Oxygen Demand 5 days 20oC 2mg/l or less
Outdoor bathing
(Organized)
B Total Coliforms Organism MPN/100ml shall be 500 or less
pH between 6.5 and 8.5
Dissolved Oxygen 5mg/l or more
Biochemical Oxygen Demand 5 days 20oC 3mg/l or less
Drinking water
source after
conventional
treatment and
disinfection
C Total Coliforms Organism MPN/100ml shall be 5000 or less
pH between 6 to 9
Dissolved Oxygen 4mg/l or more
Biochemical Oxygen Demand 5 days 20oC 3mg/l or less
Propagation of
Wild life and
Fisheries
D pH between 6.5 to 8.5
Dissolved Oxygen 4mg/l or more
Free Ammonia (as N) 1.2 mg/l or less
Irrigation,
Industrial Cooling,
Controlled Waste
disposal
E pH between 6.0 to 8.5
Electrical Conductivity at 25oC micro mhos/cm Max.2250
Sodium absorption Ratio Max. 26
Boron Max. 2mg/l
Below-E Not Meeting A, B, C, D & E Criteria
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
100
The Ground water quality for the three locations mentioned in Table 5.11 has
been elaborated below (Table 5.14)
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
101
Table 5.14 Groundwater Quality observed during the monitoring Period
SN. Parameter Unit Method GW1 GW2 GW3 IS 10500 Limits
(Acceptable)
IS 10500 Limits
(Permissible)
1 Color CU APHA 2120 C <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5 25
2 pH @ 26.2oC - APHA 4500H+
B 8.38 8.23 8.21 6.5
8.5
3 Turbidity NTU APHA 2130 B <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1 5
4 Oil & Grease mg/L APHA 5520 B <10 <10 <10 Not Specified Not Specified
5 Electrical Conductivity APHA 2510 - B 1225 6149 5241 Not Specified Not Specified
6 Total Dissolved solids mg/L APHA 2540 C 735 3689 3144 500 2000
7 Total Suspended Solids mg/L APHA 2540 D <10 <10 <10 Not Specified Not Specified
8 Alkalinity as CaCO3 mg/L APHA 2320 B 333.3 474.70 797.90 200 600
9 Hardness as CaCO3 mg/L APHA 2340 C 275.40 795.60 510.0 200 600
10 Calcium as Ca mg/L APHA 3500 Ca
B 49.05 81.76 77.67 75 200
11 Magnesium as Mg mg/L APHA 3500-
Mg B 37.17 143.75 76.83 30 100
12 Chlorides as Cl- mg/L APHA 4500 Cl-
C 115.77 442.98 437.94 250 1000
13 Sulphates as SO4 mg/L APHA 4500
SO4 D 51.45 1701.96 521.08 200 400
14 Nitrate as NO3 mg/L APHA 4500
NO3 B 8.58 19.72 73.90 45 100
15 Fluoride as F mg/L APHA 4500F-
D 1.44 1.91 1.58 1.0 1.5
16 Iron as Fe mg/L APHA 3500 Fe
B 0.53 0.63 1.19 0.3 1.0
17 Chromium as Cr+6 mg/L APHA 3500 Cr
B <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 0.05
18 Zinc as Zn mg/L APHA 3111 B <0.2 0.24 0.76 5 15
19 Chemical Oxygen
Demand mg/L APHA 5220 B
<5.0 19.20 17.28 Not Specified Not Specified
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
102
SN. Parameter Unit Method GW1 GW2 GW3 IS 10500 Limits
(Acceptable)
IS 10500 Limits
(Permissible)
20 Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (3 Days at 27OC) mg/L IS : 3025 (P-44)
<4.0 <4.0 <4.0 Not Specified Not Specified
21 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L APHA 4500 O -
C
5.4 5.3 5.4 Not Specified Not Specified
22 Salinity mg/L APHA 2520,B 209.14 209.14 791.16 Not Specified Not Specified
23 Lead as Pb mg/L APHA 3111 B <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 0.05
24 Manganese as Mn mg/L APHA 3111 B <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.3
25 Cadmium as Cd mg/L APHA 3111 B <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01
26 Copper as Cu mg/L APHA 3111 B <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 1.5
27 Cyanide as CN- mg/L APHA 4500
CN- C, E <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 0.05
28 Mercury as Hg mg/L APHA 3112 B <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 No relaxation
29 Phenolic Compounds as
Phenols mg/L
APHA 5530
D
<0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 0.002
30 Phosphorus as P mg/L APHA 4500
PC <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Not Specified Not Specified
31 Total Coliform MPN/100ml APHA 9221B Absent Absent Absent ----
Shall not be
detectable in any
100ml sample
32 Faecal Coliform MPN/100ml APHA 9221 B Absent Absent Absent ---- Not Specified
Source: Primary baseline data
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
103
Analysis of water samples shows the following:
pH of the groundwater samples were found in the range of 8.2 to 8.3 and
the. Therefore the pH of all the samples was found within prescribed
range;
Total Hardness (as CaCO3) in the groundwater samples of the study area
ranges from 275.40 to 795 mg/L. which were above the acceptable and
permissible limits of 200 mg/ L and within permissible limit at GW-1 and
GW-3 and above the permsible limit of 600 mg/ L at GW-2. A similar
trend was observed in the ground water samples when tested for
Alkalinity (as CaCO3).
The Total Dissolved solids for all ground water samples had values that
ranged from 735 mg/ L to 3144 mg/L which were above the acceptable
and permissible limits of 500 mg/L and 2000 mg/L.
Iron was observed to be above the acceptable limit of 0.3 mg/l at GW-1
and GW-2 and above the permissible limit at GW-3. Iron content in the
surface water sample was observed to be within limits.
Chlorides was observed to exceed the acceptable limit in GW2 and GW3
locations with 442.9mg/l and 437.9mg/l respectively;
Sulphate was observed to exceed the permissible limit at GW2 and GW3,
with the highest values being observed at GW2 i.e. 1701.9 mg/Lwhile
nitrate were observed to exceed the desired limit in GW3 location;
GW2 and GW3 ground water samples were reported to have fluoride level
that were above the permissible limit at 1.91 mg/l to 1.58 mg/l
respectively;
Magnesium was found to be above the acceptable at GW-1 and GW-3 and
above permissible limits at GW-2;
Heavy metals, viz. Mercury, Selenium, Cadmium, Arsenic, Lead and Zinc
were observed below detectable limits in all samples; and
Faecal coliforms are absent in all ground water samples.
5.4.10 Soil Quality
1 soil sample was collected to assess the composition and properties off the
soil, the details of the location have been detailed in Table 5.15. A map
showing the location has been presented in Figure 5.21. The soil results are
presented in Annex H.
Table 5.15 Details of soil sampling location
S.N Location Station
Code
Zone Easting
(mE)
Northing
(mN)
Type of
Sample
Justification for
Location of
Sample
Soil sample
1 Thagguparthy
Village
So1 43 P 737245.06 1628964.06 Soil used
primarily
for the
purpose of
Soil sample that
has been
periodically used
for the purpose
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
104
S.N Location Station
Code
Zone Easting
(mE)
Northing
(mN)
Type of
Sample
Justification for
Location of
Sample
agriculture of cultivating
crops has been
used in this
assessment.
Note: The Coordinates have been presented in the UTM Format
The analysis of soil has been provided in in Table 5.16,
Table 5.16 Analysis report of the soil sample (So1)
S. N. Test Parameters Unit Method Result
1 pH
- IS 2720 (Part
26)-1987
(RA:2002) 8.16
2 Moisture % IS 9235-1979 3.11
3
Organic Carbon
% IS 2720 (part
22)- 1972
(RA:2010) 0.85
4
Available Calcium as Ca
mg/kg STIDA and
CGI 5610.66
5
Available Magnesium and Mg
mg/kg STIDA and
CGI 1591.49
6
Available Nitrogen as N
mg/kg STIDA and
CGI 56.55
7
Available Phosphates as P
mg/kg STIDA and
CGI 50.33
8 Available Potassium as K mg/kg FAO 2007 279.79
9
Cadmium as Cd
mg/kg SW-846
3050B and
7130 <10
10
Chromium as Cr
mg/kg SW-846
3050B and
7190 32.38
11
Nickel and Ni
mg/kg SW-846
3050B and
7520 80.87
12
Lead as Pb
mg/kg SW-846
3050B and
7420 <10
13
Copper
mg/kg SW-846
3050B and
7210 32.66
14
Zinc as Zn
mg/kg SW-846
3050B and
7950 104.83
Source: Primary baseline data
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
105
Figure 5.21 Map showing the soil sampling location in the Project AoI
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
106
5.5 ECOLOGICAL BASELINE
An ecological survey was undertaken from 03-05 May 2016 at the Belluguppa
wind farm and surrounding areas located in Anantapur district of Andhra
Pradesh to understand and establish the ecological baseline of the study areas
and to understand impacts of the Project on species and habitats in
surrounding areas. To conduct the survey, a core and buffer zone was
delineated, so that the magnitude of the impact on ecological receptors can be
established at a later stage of the ESIA process. The determined core and
buffer zone is as follows:
Core Zone: 500 m radius from each of the proposed WTG location; and
Buffer Zone: 5 km radius from each of the proposed WTG location.
The above core and buffer zones have been standardized based on multiple
wind farm ecological assessments carried out by ERM in the last few years.
5.5.1 Objectives
The ecological surveys were conducted with following objectives:
Flora
Identification of sensitive habitats, and forest land falling within the
determined study areas (core + buffer zone);
Classification of flora for any threatened, protected or endemic floral
species prevailing in the study areas (including wind farm) based on field
surveys;
Identification of areas protected under international conventions, national
or local legislation and those recognized nationally and internationally for
their ecological, landscape, cultural or other related value; and
Identification of aquatic flora in the water bodies falling in the study areas.
Fauna
Identification of fauna (specifically amphibians, birds, mammals and
reptiles) based on direct sightings, calls, pug marks, droppings, nests, etc.;
Identification and classification of any species recognized as threatened (in
accordance with the IUCN Red List V 2016.1 and according to the
schedules of the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 and amendments);
Identification of areas which are important or sensitive for ecological
reasons including their breeding, nesting, foraging, resting, over wintering
areas including wildlife migratory corridors /avian migratory routes; and
Identification and assessment of aquatic ecological resources within the
study areas.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
107
5.5.2 Study area
The vegetation of the area is classified as Southern Tropical Thorn Forest
6A/C1 as per Champion and Seth Vegetation Classification, 1968 (1). The
vegetation classification of the Study areas is provided in Table 5.17 below.
Table 5.17 Vegetation Classification of the Region
Classification Scheme Classification
Biogeographic Province of India (2) 6E: Deccan Peninsula-Deccan South
Agro Ecological Sub Region 1
(Indian Council of Agricultural Research)
Karnataka plateau Rayalaseema as inclusive
Agro Ecological Sub Region (3.0)
Agro-Climatic Region 1
(Planning Commission)
Southern Plateau and Hills Region (X)
Agro Climatic Zone 1
(National Agricultural Research Project)
Scare rainfall zone of Andhra Pradesh (AP-6)
Source: 1 http://agricoop.nic.in/Admin_Agricoop/Uploaded_File/AP14-Anantapur%2031.1.2011.pdf
Map of the study area is provided in Figure 5.22
Figure 5.22 Map of the Study Area
Source: Google Earth. Accessed on 04/07/2016
5.5.3 Approach and Methodology
The study area primarily consists of agricultural areas, scrub forest and waterbodies. Waterbodies listed in Table 5.18 were surveyed in the study area in order to assess mass resting/ roosting/ feeding sites for water/migratory birds likely to use the habitats.
(1) Champion H. & Seth S.K., 1968, A Revised Survey of the Forest Types of India, Nataraj Publishers, Dehradun, India. (2) Rodgers, W.A., Panwar, H.S. and Mathur, V. B. (2002). Wildlife Protected Area Network in India: A Review (Executive
summary). Wildlife Institute of India. Dehradun.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
108
Table 5.18 Water bodies surveyed in the study area
SN. Code Water Body Latitude Longitude Location Water
Present
1 W1 Jeedipalli Reservoir 14.692439° 77.267473° Buffer Yes
2 W2 Kanekallu Tank 14.795398° 77.062467° Buffer Yes
Note: The Coordinates have been presented in the Degree Decimal Format
Faunal Analysis
Faunal species from the study areas were recorded based on direct sightings,
indirect evidences such as dung, droppings, scats, pugmarks, scratch signs,
burrows, nests etc. The species occurring within the study area were surveyed
using the below methods:
Amphibians
Amphibians are often restricted to natural and constructed ponds during the
hottest parts of the day (1). All such water bodies were visited during the
hottest parts of the day to determine the presence of amphibians along the
shaded ledges of the water body.
Reptiles
Reptile presence was determined through the use of Intensive Time
Constrained Search Methods (2) (3). The method was adapted for the terrain by
targeting rocks and logs located around water bodies or recently dried
streams, hedges and along the trunks of higher vegetation.
Avifauna
An adapted avifaunal survey method for onshore wind farm assessments was
utilized for the purpose of this study (4). The adapted survey method focuses
on key habitat features, preferred time of day to ensure maximum bird
activity and target species (e.g. birds of prey and waterfowl). Any avifaunal
species that was identified by visually sighting or hearing of bird calls was
recorded. Birds were identified along motorable roads, around water bodies
and in clumps of higher vegetation during the hottest parts of the day.
Binoculars and standard field guides (5) were used for avifaunal identification.
(1) Knutson et. al. 2004. Agricultural ponds support amphibian populations. Ecological Applications. 14 (3): 669-684 (2) Welsh, H.H., jr. 1987. Monitoring herpetofauna in woodlands of north western California and south west Oregon: a
comparative strategy. Pp. 203-213. In. Multiple – Use Management of Califirnia’s hardwood resources. T.R. Plumb, N.H.
Pillisbury (eds. Gen. Tech. Regional Environmental Planning. PSW – 100) US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. (3) Welsh, H.H. Jr. and Lind, A. 1991. The structure of the herpetofaunal assemblage in the Douglas-fir/hardwood forests
of northwestern California and south western Oregon. Pp: 395-411. In: Wildlife and vegetation of unmanaged Douglas-fir
forests. (Tech. Coords). L.F. Ruggiero, K.B. Aubry, A.B. Carey and M.H. Huff. Ge. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-285. Portland, OR:
US. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. (4) Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH). 2014. Recommended bird survey methods to inform impact assessment of onshore
wind farms. (5) Grimmet, R. Inskipp, C. and Inskipp, T. 2013. Birds of the Indian Subcontinent - Second Edition. Published by
Christopher Helm, 49-51 Bedford Square, London.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
109
Mammals
Mammal surveys were conducted along motorable roads, near water bodies
and in grassy terrain. Individuals were identified through direct (visual
sighting) and indirect (pellets, tracks, paw marks and scat) methods. Species
were then identified using standard literature (1) (2).
Secondary Sources
Secondary literature from published books and research publications were
also consulted for the flora and fauna of the study area. The conservation
status of the species was assessed by referring to the IUCN Red List V 2016.1,
and, the schedules of the Indian Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 [IWP] and
subsequent amendments.
5.5.4 Floral Assessment
The habitats in the core and buffer zone include agricultural land, isolated
hillocks and water bodies. The vegetation associated with these habitats is
described below and shown in Figure 5.23.
Agricultural Land
The crops in the agricultural fields consisted of Rice (Oryza sativa), Groundnut
(Arachis hypogea), Banana (Musa sp.), Corn (Zeea mays), Papaya (Carica papaya),
Castor (Ricinus communis), Palm Oil (Elaeis oleifera) and Lemon (Glycine max)
orchards. Acacia sp., Albizzia sp., Azadirachta indica, Ficus religiosa, Ficus sp.,
Prosopis cineraria, Tamarindus indica, Eucalyptus sp., Albizia saman, Millettia
pinnata, Cocos nucifera, Delonix regia, Moringa oleifera and Dalbergia sp. were the
trees observed in the study area. Argemone mexicana, Calotropis sp., Capparis
decidua, Cassia auriculata, Opuntia sp., Agave sp. and Lantana camara were the
shrubs observed in the study area. The weed, Parthenium hysterophorus and the
palm, Borassus flabellifer was present in the study area.
Scrub Forests
Scrub vegetation is restricted to the hillocks that constitute the Beluguppa
Reserved Forest, which lies in the Core Zone of the project area. Two WTG's -
BLG-007 and BLG-021 fall within 250 and 180 meters of the Belluguppa
Reserve Forest respectively, and, 2 WTG's - BLG-022 and BLG-008 lie at a
distance of 770 meters from the Belluguppa Reserve Forest.
Water Bodies
(1) Prater, S.H. 2005. The Book of Indian Animals. Bombay Natural History Society and Oxford University Press - 12th
Edition. pp 316 (2) Menon, V. 2003. A field guide to Indian Mammals. Dorling Kindersley (India) Ltd. New Delhi, 201 p
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
110
Two waterbodies, the Jeedipalli Reservoir and the Kanekallu Tank were
surveyed. The Kanekallu Tank had thick stands of Ipomea sp. The closest WTG
to the Jeedipalli Reservoir is BLG-163, located at a bearing of 105.04 degrees
and a distance of 5.07 km. The closest WTG to the Kanekallu Tank is BLG-014,
located at a bearing of 335.86 degrees and a distance of 4.45 km.
Figure 5.23 Habitat surveyed in the Study Area
Jeedipalli Reservoir Agricultural Land
Scrub vegetation in the Beluguppa Reserved
Forest
Dried up Kanekallu Tank
Source: Site and surrounding areas survey by ERM during the site visit
5.5.5 Faunal Assessment
Faunal assessment was carried out using methods described above (Section
6.5.3) for each of the target class of animals – amphibians, reptiles, avifauna
and mammals. As shown in Table 5.19, this involved maximizing the early
morning hours to locate birds and mammals when they are expected to be
most active. The mid-morning hours involved random searching of shelters
for amphibian and reptile presence and opportunistic sightings of birds and
mammals.
Table 5.19 Time utilization for ecology assessment
Time Targeted Habitats Targeted Class of Animals
Early Morning
(0600-1000 hours)
In and around water bodies Birds and mammals
Mid-Morning
(1000-1300 hours)
Agricultural fields, rocky
terrain, tree clusters, dried
streams and scrubland.
Amphibians, reptiles and birds
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
111
Amphibians
Five species are reported from the study area. None of the species bear any
conservational significance. The details of the species are given in Table 5.20.
Table 5.20 Amphibians reported from the study area
SN. Common Name Scientific Name Family Sourc
e
WPA
Schedul
e
IUCN
Statu
s
1 Common Indian
Toad
Duttaphrynus
melanostictus
Bufonidae SS Not
listed
LC
2 Indian Skipper Frog Euphlyctis cyanophlyctis Dicroglossida
e
SS Not
listed LC
3 Painted Frog Kaloula pulchra Microhylidae SS Not
listed LC
4 Indian Pond Frog Euphlyctis hexadactylus Dicroglossida
e
SS Not
listed LC
5 Indian Bull Frog Hoplobatrachus tigerinus Dicroglossida
e
SS Not
listed LC
Notes: LC-Least Concern; PS-Primary Survey; CC-Community Consultation; SS-Secondary Source
Reptiles
Eleven species are reported from the study area. The Python (Python molorus)
and Russel’s Viper (Daboia russelii) are listed respectively in Schedule’s I and II
of Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. The Python (Python molorus) is categorized as
Near Threatened (NT) as per IUCN Red List V 2016.1. The details of reptiles
are given in Table 5.21.
Table 5.21 Reptiles reported from the study area
SN. English /
Popular Name
Scientific Name Family Sources WPA
Schedule
IUCN Status
1 Python Python molurus Pythonidae SS I NT
2 Russel's viper Daboia russelii Viperidae SS II LC
3 Saw-scaled viper Echis carinata Viperidae SS IV Not assessed
4 Rat snake Ptyas mucosa Colubridae SS IV Not assessed
5 Star Tortoise Geochelone
elegans
Testudinidae SS IV VU
6 Flat tailed Gecko Hemidactylus
platyurus
Gekkonidae SS Not listed Not assessed
7 Brooke's Gecko Hemidactylus
brooki
Gekkonidae SS Not listed Not assessed
8 Spotted Rock
Gecko
Hemidactylus
maculatus
Gekkonidae SS Not listed LC
9 Keeled Grass
Skink
Eutropis carinata Scincidae SS Not listed LC
10 Indian Garden
Lizard
Calotes versicolor Agamidae SS Not listed Not assessed
11 Peninsular Rock
Agama
Psammophilus
dorsalis
Agamidae SS Not listed LC
Notes: LC-Least Concern, SS-Secondary Sources; PS-Primary Survey; CC-Community Consultation
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
112
Avifauna
A total of 59 bird species were recorded in the study area, out of which 28
species were aquatic and 31 species were terrestrial. One species, the Black-
bellied Tern (Sterna acuticauda) is listed as Endangered (EN), and, four species,
the Black-headed Ibis (Threskiornis melanocephalus), Darter (Anhinga
melanogaster), Red-necked Falcon (Falco chicquera), and River Tern (Sterna
aurantia) are listed as Near Threatened (NT) as per the IUCN Red List of
Threatened Species V 2016.1. Four species, the Black shouldered Kite (Elanus
axillaris), Red-necked Falcon (Falco chicquera), Brahminy Kite (Haliastur indus)
and Shikra (Accipiter badius) are listed under Schedule 1 of the Indian Wildlife
Protection Act, 1972 and amendments, and are accorded the highest
protection. Observed avifaunal species from the study area are shown in
Figure 5.24 and listed in Table 5.22.
Figure 5.24 Avifaunal Species observed in the Study Area
Ashy-crowned Sparrow-lark Ashy Prinia Black-bellied Tern
Black-headed Ibis Black Ibis Brahminy Kite
Brahminy Starling Black-shouldered Kite Black-winged Stilt
Cattle Egret Common Babbler Common Coot
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
113
Collared Dove Common Myna Great Cormorant
Coucal Darter Grey Francolin
Grey Heron Glossy Ibis Common Crow
Indian Courser Indian Pond Heron Indian Roller
Indian Silverbill Laughing Dove Little Egret
Little Grebe Large-grey Babbler Openbill
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
114
Pied Bushchat Pied Kingfisher Purple Sunbird
Red-headed Falcon River Tern Rufous-tailed Lark
Red-wattled Lapwing Spot-billed Duck Small-green Bee-eater
Shikra White-breasted Kingfisher White-breasted Waterhen
Lesser Whistling-duck Yellow-billed Babbler Yellow-wattled Lapwing
Source: Site and surrounding areas survey by ERM during the site visit
Table 5.22 Avifaunal Species observed in the Study Area
SN Common Name
Scientific Name
Family Migratory Status
Habitats IUCN WPA , 1972
1 Ashy crowned Sparrow Lark
Eremopterix griseus
Alaudidae R T LC IV
2 Ashy Prinia Prinia socialis Cisticolidae R T LC IV
3 Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica Hirundinidae M T LC IV
4 Black-shouldered Kite
Elanus axillaris Accipitridae R T LC I
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
115
SN Common Name
Scientific Name
Family Migratory Status
Habitats IUCN WPA , 1972
5 Black winged Stilt
Himantopus himantopus
Recurvirostridae R A LC IV
6 Black-headed Ibis
Threskiornis melanocephalus
Threskiornithidiae R A NT IV
7 Brahminy Starling
Sturnus pagodarum
Sturnidae R T LC IV
8 Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis Ardeidae R A LC IV
9 Common Babbler
Turdoides caudata
Timaliidae R T LC IV
10 Common Coot Fulica atra Rallidae M A LC IV
11 Common Myna Acridotheres tristis
Sturnidae R T LC IV
12 Darter Anhinga melanogaster
Anhingidae R A NT IV
13 Eurasian Collared Dove
Streptopelia decaocto
Columbidae R T LC IV
14 Eurasian Openbill
Anastomus oscitans
Ciconiidae R A LC IV
15 Glossy Ibis Plegadis falcinellus
Threskiornithidiae R,M A LC IV
16 Great Cormorant
Phalacrocorax carbo
Phalacrocoracidae R A LC IV
17 Great White Egret
Ardea alba Ardeidae R A LC IV
18 Greater Coucal Centropus sinensis
Cuculidae R T LC IV
19 Green Bee-eater Merops orientalis Meropidae R T LC IV
20 Blue-faced Malkoha
Phaenicophaeus viridirostris
Cuculidae R T LC IV
21 Grey Francolin Francolinus pondicerianus
Phasianidae R T LC IV
22 Grey Heron Ardea cinerea Ardeidae R A LC IV
23 House Crow Corvus splendens
Corvidae R T LC V
24 House Sparrow Passer domesticus
Passeridae R T LC IV
25 Indian Cormorant
Phalacrocorax fuscicollis
Phalacrocoracidae R A LC IV
26 Indian Courser Cursorius coromandelicus
Glareolidae R T LC IV
27 Indian Jungle Crow
Corvus macrorhynchos
Corvidae R T LC IV
28 Indian Koel Eudynamys scolopaceus
Cuculidae R T LC IV
29 Indian Pond Heron
Ardeola grayii Ardeidae R A LC IV
30 Indian Robin Saxicoloides fulicatus
Muscicapidae R T LC IV
31 Indian Roller Coracias benghalensis
Coraciidae R T LC IV
32 Indian Silverbill
Lonchura malabarica
Estrildidae R T LC IV
33 Intermediate Egret
Mesophoyx intermedia
Ardeidae R A LC IV
34 Brahminy Kite Haliastur indus Accipitridae R A LC I
35 Large-grey Babbler
Turdoides malcolmi
Leiothrichidae R T LC IV
36 Laughing Dove Spilopelia senegalensis
Columbidae R T LC IV
37 Lesser Whistling Duck
Dendrocygna javanica
Anatidae R A LC IV
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
116
SN Common Name
Scientific Name
Family Migratory Status
Habitats IUCN WPA , 1972
38 Little Cormorant
Microcarbo niger Phalacrocoracidae R A LC IV
39 Little Egret Egretta garzetta Ardeidae R A LC IV
40 Little Grebe Tachybaptus ruficollis
Podicipedidae R A LC IV
41 Black Ibis Pseudibis
papillosa
Threskiornithidae R A LC IV
42 Black-bellied Tern
Sterna acuticauda
Laridae R A EN IV
43 Pied Bushchat Saxicola caprata Muscicapidae R T LC IV
44 Pied Kingfisher Ceryle rudis Alcedinidae R A LC IV
45 Purple Sunbird Nectarinia asiatica
Nectariniidae R T LC IV
46 Red-necked Falcon
Falco chicquera Falconidae R T NT I
47 Red-vented Bulbul
Pycnonotus cafer Pycnonotidae R T LC IV
48 Red-wattled Lapwing
Vanellus indicus Charadriidae R A LC IV
49 Red-Rumped Swallow
Cecropis daurica Hirundinidae R T LC IV
50 River Tern Sterna aurantia Sternidae R A NT IV
51 Rock Pigeon Columba livia Columbidae R T LC IV
52 Rufous Tailed Lark
Ammomanes phoenicura
Alaudidae R T LC IV
53 Shikra Accipiter badius Accipitridae R T LC I
54 Spot-billed Duck
Anas poecilorhyncha
Anatidae M A LC IV
55 White Throated Kingfisher
Halcyon smyrnensis
Halcyonidae R A LC IV
56 White-breasted Waterhen
Amaurornis akool
Rallidae R A LC IV
57 White-browed Wagtail
Motacilla madaraspatensis
Motacillidae R A LC IV
58 Yellow-billed Babbler
Turdoides affinis Timaliidae R T LC IV
59 Yellow-wattled Lapwing
Vanellus malarbaricus
Charadriidae R A LC IV
Migratory Status: R- Resident, M-Migrant; IUCN: EN- Endangered, NT-Near Threatened, LC-Least
Concern; WPA, 1972 (Indian Wildlife Protection Act -1972): Schedule – I, IV; Habitats: A-Aquatic, T-
Terrestrial
The Jeddipalli Reservoir supports large numbers of aquatic congregatory
species, such as cormorants and Oriental Darters. In the Kanekallu Tank, large
numbers of egrets, ibis’es and herons were observed. The observed
congregation of birds is shown in Figure 5.25 below.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
117
Figure 5.25 Congregation of aquatic birds in the study area
Cormorants and Oriental Darters resting in the Jeedipalli Reservoir. Wind turbines can be seen
in the background.
A mixed flock of egrets, herons and ibis’es in the Kanekallu Tank
Source: Site and surrounding areas survey by ERM during the site visit, May 2016.
An earlier study conducted by ERM in the area in the migratory season
(December 2013 & January 2014) documented 47 additional bird species,
which are shown in Table 5.23 below. From this survey, 11 aquatic and 10
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
118
migratory species were recorded. One species, the Painted Stork (Mycteria
leucocephala) is listed as Near Threatened (NT) as per the IUCN Red List of
Threatened Species V 2016.1. Seven species; the Black Kite (Milvus migrans),
Oriental Honey Buzzard (Pernis ptilorhynchus), White-eyed Buzzard (Butastur
teesa), Tawny Eagle (Aquila rapax), Short-toed Snake Eagle (Circaetus gallicus),
Crested Serpent Eagle (Spilornis cheela) and Indian Peafowl (Pavo cristatus) are
listed under Schedule 1 of the Indian Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 and
amendments, and are accorded the highest protection.
Table 5.23 Avifaunal Species recorded in the Study Area
SN Common Name Scientific Name Family Migratory Status
Habitats IUCN WPA , 1972
1 Rosy Starling Pastor roseus Sturnidae M T LC IV
2 Whiskered Tern Chlidonias
hybrida
Sternidae M A LC IV
3 Bar Headed
Goose
Anser indicus Anatidae M A LC IV
4 Painted Stork Mycteria
leucocephala
Ciconiidae R A NT IV
5 Purple Heron Ardea purpurea Ardeidae R A LC IV
6 Black Kite Milvus migrans Accipitridae R T LC I
7 Indian Eagle
Owl
Bubo bengalensis Strigidae R T LC IV
8 Common
Kestrel
Falco
tinnunculus
Falconidae M T LC IV
9 Long tailed
Shrike
Lanius schach Laniidae R T LC IV
10 Black Crowned
Night Heron
Nycticorax
nycticorax
Ardeidae R A LC IV
11 Oriental Honey
Buzzard
Pernis
ptilorhynchus
Accipitridae R T LC I
12 White Eyed
Buzzard
Butastur teesa Accipitridae R T LC I
13 Tawny Eagle Aquila rapax Accipitridae R T LC I
14 Short -Toed
Snake Eagle
Circaetus gallicus Accipitridae R T LC I
15 Crested Serpent
Eagle
Spilornis cheela Accipitridae R T LC I
16 Yellow legged
Buttonquail
Turnix tanki Turnicidae R T LC IV
17 Indian peafowl Pavo cristatus Phasianidae R T LC I
18 Wood
Sandpiper
Tringa glareola Scolopacidae M A LC IV
19 Green
Sandpiper
Tringa ochropus Scolopacidae M A LC IV
20 Common Snipe Gallinago
gallinago
Scolopacidae M A LC IV
21 Red collared
Dove
Streptopelia
tranquebarica
Columbidae R T LC IV
22 Spotted Dove Spilopelia
chinensis
Columbidae R T LC IV
23 Rose ringed
Parakeet
Psittacula
krameri
Psittaculidae R T LC IV
24 Indian Nightjar Caprimulgus
asiaticus
Caprimulgidae R T LC IV
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
119
SN Common Name Scientific Name Family Migratory Status
Habitats IUCN WPA , 1972
25 Jungle Owlet Glaucidium
radiatum
Strigidae R T LC IV
26 Asian Palm
Swift
Cypsiurus
balasiensis
Apodidae R T LC IV
27 House Swift Apus nipalensis Apodidae R T LC IV
28 Common
Kingfisher
Alcedo atthis Alcedinidae R T LC IV
29 Common
Hoopoe
Upupa epops Upupidae R T LC IV
30 Coppersmith
Barbet
Megalaima
haemacephala
Megalaimidae R T LC IV
31 Indian Grey
Hornbill
Ocyceros birostris Bucerotidae R T LC IV
32 Black-naped
Oriole
Oriolus chinensis Oriolidae R T LC IV
33 Oriental Skylark Alauda gulgula Alaudidae R T LC IV
34 Black Drongo Dicrurus
macrocercus
Dicruridae R T LC IV
35 Red Whiskered
Bulbul
Pycnonotus
jocosus
Pycnonotidae R T LC IV
36 Red Throated
Flycatcher
Ficedula albicilla Muscicapidae R T LC IV
37 Zitting Cisticola Cisticola juncidis Cisticolidae R T LC IV
38 Common Tailor
Bird
Orthotomus
sutorius
Cisticolidae R T LC IV
39 Oriental Magpie
Robin
Copsychus
saularis
Muscicapidae R T LC IV
40 Paddyfield Pipit Anthus rufulus Motacillidae R T LC IV
41 Purple rumped
Sunbird
Leptocoma
zeylonica
Nectariniidae R T LC IV
42 White Wagtail Motacilla alba Motacillidae R T LC IV
43 Green-billed
Malkoha
Phaenicophaeus
tristis
Cuculidae R T LC IV
44 Ruddy
Shelduck
Tadorna
ferruginea
Anatidae M A LC IV
45 Northern
Shoveler
Anas clypeata Anatidae M A LC IV
46 Western Yellow
Wagtail
Motacilla flava Motacillidae R T LC IV
47 Western Reef
Heron
Egretta gularis Ardeidae M A LC IV
Mammals
Twelve mammals are reported from the study area. One species, the Indian
Pangolin (Manis crassicaudata) is classified as Endangered (EN), and, one
species, the Blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra), is classified as Near Threatened
(NT) as per the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species V 2016.1. Both the Indian
Pangolin and Blackbuck are listed in Schedule I of the Indian Wildlife
Protection Act, 1972 and amendments, and are accorded the highest
protection. Solitary blackbuck males were observed twice in different
locations and a blackbuck group were observed once, as shown in Figure 5.26
below.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
120
Table 5.24 Details of Mammals recorded from the Study area
SN. English Name
Scientific Name Family Source WPA
Schedule
IUCN
Status
1 Jackal Canis aureus Canidae SS II LC
2 Common Fox Vulpes bengalensis Canidae SS II LC
3 Wild boar Sus scrofa Suidae SS III LC
4 Spotted Deer Axis axis Cervidae SS III LC
5 Bonnet Macaque Macaca radiate Cercopithecidae SS II LC
6 Common Langur Semnopithecus entellus Cercopithecidae SS II LC
7 Blackbuck Antelope cervicapra Bovidae SS I NT
8 Indian Pangolin Manis crassicaudata Manidae SS I EN
9 Indian Grey
Mongoose
Herpestes edwardsii Herpestidae SS II LC
10 Jungle Cat Felis chaus Felidae SS II LC
11 Five Striped
Squirrel
Funambulus pennantii Sciuridae SS IV LC
12 Black-naped Hare Lepus nigricollis Leporidae SS IV LC
Notes: IUCN-International Union for Conservation of Nature, WPA-Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, LC-
Least Concern, NT- Near Threatened, EN-Endangered; SS-Secondary Sources
Figure 5.26 Blackbuck observed in the study area
A blackbuck group A solitary blackbuck male
A solitary blackbuck male
Source: Site and surrounding areas survey by ERM during the site visit, May 2016.
5.5.6 Protected Areas
No protected areas occur within 5 kilometres of the WTG locations.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
121
5.5.7 Migratory Routes
The Central Asian Flyway (CAF) used by migratory ducks and birds lies over
the study area, as can be seen in Figure 5.27 below. 12 migratory birds were
recorded and they are likely to use the waterbodies in the study area.
Figure 5.27 Map showing estimated migration routes for Anatidae species in the Central
Asian Flyway
Estimated migration routes of Anatidae in the Central Asian Flyway (CAF). Relative use for
CAF is displayed in yellow-red. From darkest to lightest, colors represent 50%, 75% and 99%
cumulative probability contours. CAF marking sites include Terkiin Tsagaan Lake, Mongolia
(TT), Qinghai Lake, China (QL), Chitwan National Park, Nepal (CP), Pong Dam, India (PD),
Keoladeo National Park, India (KP), Brahmaputra River, India (BR), Hakaluki Haor, Bangladesh
(HH), West Bengal, India (WB), Chilika Lake, India (CL) and Koonthankulam, India (KT).
Dotted yellow line represents the CAF flyway outline (1) .
(1) Source: Palm, Eric C., Scott H. Newman, Diann J. Prosser, Xiangming Xiao, Luo Ze, Nyambayar Batbayar,
Sivananinthaperumal Balachandran, and John Y. Takekawa. "Mapping migratory flyways in Asia using dynamic Brownian
bridge movement models." Movement ecology.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
122
5.6 SOCIO ECONOMIC BASELINE
This section presents socio economic baseline of the study area for the
OUWPPL project which is being developed by Suzlon.
5.6.1 Study Area
The area of up to 5 km distance from the project boundary (windfarm area)
has been demarcated as study area for both projects by considering the extent
of project impact in terms of noise, shadow flicker, water resources, human
settlement, cultural heritage sites, location of labour sites, location of the
access roads, common property resources etc. besides considering the actual
land area which is acquired/proposed to be acquired for both the project and
its utilities footprints.
The study area is further bifurcated into the core zone and buffer zone. The
core zone covers the surrounding distance up to 1 km from the wind farm
area. The buffer zone consists of the area at 4 km ahead of the core zone,
covering project components such as pooling substation, transmission line,
scrap yard and switching substation etc. From the toposheets, it was observed
that there are 23 villages in the study area, of which six are in the core zone
and the remaining in buffer.
Map of the study area for these projects is presented in Figure 1.2.
5.6.2 Approach and Methodology
The socio-economic baseline for this project has been developed on the basis
of a combination of a secondary literature review, as well as the inferences
drawn from the consultations with different stakeholders including the local
community.
Review of secondary information
A review and assessment of the available secondary data and information for
the study area was undertaken in order to substantiate and corroborate the
understanding gained through stakeholder consultations, understand the
performance of the area on socio-economic parameters as well as allow for a
comparative assessment of the project area vis-à-vis the block and district
level socio economic baseline information. For the purpose of the desk based
assessment, following documents and literature have been reviewed:
Provisional Data, Census of India 2011;
Primary Census Abstract data 2011;
District Statistical Handbook - 2011 for Anantapur District ;
Agriculture census abstract of Beluguppa Mandal;
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
123
Project description and study area related reports in order to understand
social sensitivities, if any in the project area; and
Published research papers, articles and other information available in
public domain on aspects such as irrigation, drinking water supply
system, livelihood pattern, land, local governance and decentralisation,
civil society and NGOs as well as economic policies and regional
development plans the state is pursuing.
Stakeholder Mapping and consultation
The stakeholders for this project differ in terms of the degree of impact,
interest, and influence over the project. The stakeholder mapping and its
analysis was conducted with the objective of identifying each stakeholder
group; studying their profile, characteristics and the nature of their stakes;
gauging their influence on the project; and understanding the specific issues,
concerns as well as expectations of each group from the project.
Figure 5.28 Consultation with one of the affected community in Project study area
Source: ERM site visit, May2016
Key groups of stakeholders who were consulted during the study process
were local community, panchayat president, panchayat secretary, contractors,
daily wagers etc. The consultation process was also undertaken with the aim
of informing the stakeholders about the project, its proposed activities, while
assessing the awareness levels about the project in the community and
simultaneously identifying some of the key issues, concerns and expectations
of the community.
Consultations and discussions with the relevant block and district officials,
line departments and civil society groups were also conducted so as to gain a
better understanding of the developmental and historical context of the area,
as well as the development needs of the area in general and of the specific
stakeholder groups in particular.
Primary data/information collection
Under this phase consultations were undertaken with the local community,
key informants in study area, gram panchayat representatives, local teachers
etc. with the objective of building ground level understanding of the
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
124
concerned issues and also gather primary data wherever feasible to support
the observations gained through these consultations.
5.6.3 Administrative set up of the Study Area
District Anantapur is administratively managed by 63 Mandals1. Study area
for the project falls under Beluguppa Mandal. Administrative linkage of the
villages under study areas are presented in Figure 5.29 provided below.
Figure 5.29 Administrative set up of the study areas
Source: Census 2011 Data
Of the 23 villages identified in the toposheet, only 17 could be identified from
Census Data, 2011. All the core zone villages come under Beluguppa Mandal.
Since 10 villages out of the 17 fall under Beluguppa Mandal, this section
focuses only on Beluguppa mandal for Mandal level data. The other villages
are distributed across Rayadurga, Kanekal and Guntakal mandals.
5.6.4 Demographic Profile
This section provides a demographic overview of the study area to provide a clear understanding of the socio-economic and cultural context within which the project is located. Table 5.25 broad demographic features of the region wherein project study area is located.
Table 5.25 Demographic profile of the study region
Study region
No
of
Ho
use
ho
lds
To
tal
po
pu
lati
on
Se
x r
ati
o
SC
%
ST
%
Po
pu
lati
on
de
nsi
ty
De
cad
e
gro
wth
ra
te
Lit
era
cy
rate
Fe
ma
le
lite
racy
ra
te
Andhra Pradesh 21022588 8458077
7
992 16.4 7 308 11.1 67.66 59.74
Anantapur district 968160 4081148 977 14.3 3.8 213 12.1 64 54
Beluguppa Mandal 10056 43735 974 19.1 7.9 93 7.9 62 51
Source: Census 2011 Data
1 Mandal/Tehsil is an entity of local government, an administrative centre usually with a number of villages
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
125
Beluguppa Mandal seems to be backward in most of the demographic
indicators. Beluguppa Mandal also records a low decadal population growth
rate as per 2011 census data compared to population recorded in 2001 census
data. Sex ratio is also observed to be low in Beluguppa Mandal at 974 female
per thousand male, which is much below the state figure of 992 as per Census
2011 data. The female literacy is also far lower compared to State and District
figures at 51%.
In the Human Development Report for Andhra Pradesh 2007, Anantapur ranks 19 among the
23 districts of the State.
Beluguppa Mandal has a significant proportion of Scheduled Castes1 and
Scheduled2 Tribes. However, as mentioned in Section 1.1.1, the area does not
fall under Schedule V area, as specified in the Indian Constitution.
As per the Handbook of Statistics, only 25 percentage of the Anantapur
district has urban population, while Beluguppa Mandal is 100% classified as
rural.
Demographic profile of the villages falling under the study area is captured in
Table 5.26.
Table 5.26 Demography of the study area villages
Villages
No
of
Ho
use
ho
lds
To
tal
po
pu
lati
on
Se
x r
ati
o
SC
%
ST
%
Lit
era
cy r
ate
Fe
ma
le
lite
racy
ra
te
Core Village
Avulenna 317 1422 951 21.7 0.4 56.5 40.0
Beluguppa 1673 7457 953 12.9 21.6 58.8 39.2
Sreerangapuram 764 3432 997 19.9 0.0 50.9 39.9
Thagguparthy 473 2099 997 30.2 0.0 63.4 44.2
Yerragudi 301 1280 1003 31.6 0.0 60.5 41.1
Total 11,911 51,968 984
(avera
ge)
23.2
(avera
ge)
4.4
(aver
age)
58.0
(avera
ge)
40.9
(avera
ge)
Buffer Village
Ankampalle 772 3095 989 16.3 0.2 50.9 40.1
Brahmanapalle 925 3765 987 14.2 0.0 49.9 39.3
Duddekunta 613 2513 963 25.7 0.0 54.5 40.3
Hanakanahal 688 3309 981 14.9 0.0 58.9 40.0
Kalekurthi 393 1933 945 17.7 0.0 40.7 36.0
Kasapuram 859 3692 982 14.5 0.8 49.3 39.6
Narinjangundlapalle 423 1845 936 23.0 1.9 51.2 38.5
1 The “Scheduled Castes” is the legal and constitutional name collectively given to the groups which have traditionally
occupied the lowest status in Indian society and the Hindu religion which provides the religious and ideological basis for
an “untouchable” group, which was outside the caste system and inferior to all other castes.
2Article 366 (25) defined scheduled tribes as "such tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within such tribes or
tribal communities as are deemed under Article 342 to be Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of this constitution".
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
126
Villages
No
of
Ho
use
ho
lds
To
tal
po
pu
lati
on
Se
x r
ati
o
SC
%
ST
%
Lit
era
cy r
ate
Fe
ma
le
lite
racy
ra
te
Ramapuram 505 1972 966 16.2 0.8 45.4 39.4
Ratchumarri 406 1950 1033 19.4 0.0 42.2 41.7
Seerpi 1180 5023 926 22.9 0.4 55.7 39.4
Veparalla 1059 4640 981 17.9 0.0 40.9 40.6
Virupapuram 310 1263 955 51.3 0.1 47.5 39.2
Total 8,133 35,000 970
(avera
ge)
21.2
(avera
ge)
1.5
(aver
age)
48.9
(avera
ge)
39.5(av
erage)
Source: Census 2011 Data
Key demographic data of the revenue villages under study area indicates that
most villages are less populated with population density of most villages in
the study area lower than population density of the corresponding Mandal
data.
Secondary sources have suggested that the study areas has recorded negative
growth rate in their population in the last two census and the key reasons
identified during consultations with various stakeholders were decreasing
employment opportunities, decreasing agriculture productivity due to
decreased monsoon in these areas.
Anantapur district has also been declared as ‘Drought Prone’1 area by
government of India for previous many years
Caste and community profile of the study area further reflects that percentage
of Scheduled Tribes (ST) population is much lower in the study area
1 The 1962 Irrigation Commission defined a drought-prone area as one which receives less than 10 cm rainfall and even
three-fourths of this is not received in 20 per cent or more of the years under consideration; or an area in which 30 per cent
or less of the total cropped area is irrigated. It is difficult to provide a precise and universally accepted definition of
drought due to its varying characteristics and impacts across different regions such as rainfall patterns, human response
and resilience etc. Drought is a normal, recurrent feature of climate and occurs in all climatic regimes and is usually
characterized in terms of its spatial extension, intensity and duration. Drought causes economic, environmental and social
impacts. Ministry of Agriculture is the nodal Ministry in respect of monitoring and managing drought conditions and
droughts are classified into meteorological droughts, hydrological droughts and agricultural droughts.
Meteorological drought is classified based on rainfall deficiency w.r.t. long term average – 25% or less is normal, 26-
50% is moderate and more than 50% is severe.
Hydrological drought is best defined as deficiencies in surface and sub-surface water supplies leading to a lack of
water for normal and specific needs. Such conditions arise even in times of average (or above average) precipitation
when increased usage of water diminishes the reserves.
Agricultural drought is identified by 4 consecutive weeks of meteorological drought, weekly rainfall is 50 mm from
15/5/ to 15/10, 6 such consecutive weeks rest of the year and crop planted is 80% in kharif season.
In India, around 68% of the country is prone to drought in varying degrees. 35% which receives rainfall between 750
mm and 1125 mm is considered drought prone while 33% receiving less than 750 mm is chronically drought prone.
http://wrmin.nic.in/forms/list.aspx?lid=312
The local communities in study area are;
1) OC group: Reddy, Kamma, Balija, Brahmin and Vasyas community;
2) BC group: Golla, Korba, Vadde, Cheneta, Gboya, Lingayats, Chakali, Jangama;
3) SC group: Malla, Madhika (Harijan)
4) ST group: Erukola, Tanda
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
127
compared to Mandal level. The core villages have 4.4% of its population
classified as ST while only 1.5% of the population in the buffer villages have
been classified as SC. But it is pertinent to note that most villages in the study
area do not record any ST population and Beluguppa has the highest
proportion of ST population at 21%. The study area also is not classified as a
Schedule V area because the population of SC and ST as observed is not
significant. Remaining population are further classified into two major
groups; BC (Backward Caste) and OC (Other Caste) that is not accounted for
in the Census survey of India. In India, division of people among various caste
and communities used to be based upon profession of that particular group
and this criterion is still observed to be existing locally; however in relatively
lower degree.
Social Groups
Religious practices of the study area as per Census 2011 data reflect that 97
percent of the people identified themselves as Hindu. Table 5.27 provides
religious bifurcation of people of the study region.
Table 5.27 Religion wise classification of data
Area
To
tal
po
pu
lati
on
Hin
du
Mu
slim
Ch
rist
ian
Jain
Bu
dd
ist
Sik
h
Oth
ers
Re
lig
ion
no
t st
ate
d
Anantapur district 3640478 88.59% 10.69% 0.57% 0.03% 0.01% 0.01% 0% 9.75%
Beluguppa Mandal 40546 97.61% 2.06% 0.15% 0% 0.01% 0% 0% 0.18%
Source: Census 2011 data, Handbook of Statistics, Anantapur district 2011
5.6.5 Education profile
Literacy Profile
Literacy status of the study area villages is presented in Figure 5.30, and it
suggests that literacy rate for most of the villages in study area are similar to
the literacy rate of Beluguppa Mandal.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
128
Figure 5.30 Literacy profile of the study area villages
Source: Census 2011 Data
Only two villages in the study area, Tagguparthy and Yerragudi have literacy
levels over 60%. Thagguparthy is most literate village with 63.4% literacy rate.
Female literacy rate is also lower in all the study area villages. From the
previous experience of ERM in the area, a general trend of education level
attainment in study area as reported during a consultation with the MEO
(Mandal Education Officer) is that mostly teenagers drop out after appearing
in Secondary School Certificate (SSC) examination and key reasons cited by
MEO against this higher drop-out rate were economic conditions of the
families as well as lack of quality education. The dropout rate was reported
by MEO to be relatively higher among Scheduled Caste and Backward Caste
families. Table 5.28 provides trend of students appearing in SSC and
Intermediate examination and percentage of successful candidates over five
year span.
Table 5.28 SSC and intermediate results of Anantapur district
Boys Girls
Appeared Appeared % Passed Appeared Appeared % Passed
SSC Results
2006-2007 24565 57.0 46.4% 18533 43.00 64.1%
2007-2008 24094 59.2 81.8% 16624 40.83 85.3%
2008-2009 23924 59.2 88.7% 16508 40.83 96.1%
2009-2010 24290 57.7 94.6% 17794 42.28 96.5%
2010-2011 25639 56.5 87.3% 19714 43.47 89.7%
Intermediate Results
2006-2007 11942 57.5 53.6% 8841 42.54 59.6%
2007-2008 11996 57.5 57.3% 8882 42.54 63.7%
2008-2009 12496 54.8 51.4% 10317 45.22 54.6%
2009-2010 13470 54.3 50.1% 11315 45.65 56.3%
2010-2011 12705 54.1 54.6% 10782 45.91 60.3%
Source: Handbook of Statistics, Anantapur District
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
129
This table also reflects that number of boys and girls students appearing in
Intermediate exams is almost half of the number appeared for SSC level
exams. Further percentage of passing intermediate level exam is continuously
lower than percentage of passing SSC level exams reflecting poor education
quality at this level in the region and inability of the students in general to
afford private tutorial classes in order to improve their level of education
Educational Infrastructure
The assessment of education facilities and education promotion programs
provided by the government in study area as well as in study region indicates
that available education infrastructures in terms of number of schools is not as
poor as the literacy status suggests. Number of schools and colleges existing
in study region is show in Table 5.29. The information has been obtained from
Anantapur district statistical handbook 2011. The tables reflect that number of
primary schools is more than number of revenue villages of the three
Mandals, indicating that each village is having a primary school in its
peripheral boundary. Number of upper primary and high schools are lower;
however local education department reported that transportation allowance of
INR 1500 per student per annum is provided by the government to students
living beyond 3 km from the nearest school.
Table 5.29 Schools facilities in study region
Study region
Ce
ntr
al
Go
vt.
Sta
te G
ov
t.
Ma
nd
al
Pa
rish
ad
Mu
nic
ipa
lity
Pri
va
te a
ide
d
Pri
va
te u
n-a
ide
d
tota
l
Total students Boys % Girls%
Primary School
Anantapur district 10 2673 179 35 219 3116 226674 50.12% 49.88%
Beluguppa 29 2 31 2554 50.12% 49.88%
Upper Primary School
Anantapur district 1 615 41 2 270 929 138811 52.05% 47.95%
Beluguppa 8 1 9 967 51.50% 48.50%
High Schools
Anantapur district 5 60 388 29 15 177 674 243344 51.00% 49.00%
Beluguppa 10 2 12 2520 52.94% 47.06%
Junior colleges
Anantapur district 51 7 105 163 54123 54.64% 45.36%
Beluguppa 1 1 226 60.18% 39.82%
Source: Handbook of Statistics, Anantapur District 2011
Local government is also trying to promote education by establishing hostel
facilities for marginalised section of the society. Separate hostel facilities for
boys and girls for different social group like SC, ST, and BC have been
provided. Table 5.30 provides the status of existing hostels in study region
which suggests that total 22 hostels for different social groups are there in
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
130
three Mandals. One BC hostel also exists in Y. Ramapuram village which is
under project study area.
Table 5.30 Hostel facilities provided by government in study region
Hostel facilities Anantapur
district
Beluguppa
Mandal
SC hostel for Boys
No 89 1
Strength 7627 60
SC hostel for Girls
No 37 0
Strength 3898 0
ST hostel for Boys
No 10
Strength 1026
ST hostel for Girls
No 7
Strength 780
BC hostel for Boys
No 75 2
Strength 10535 355
BC hostel for Girls
No 16
Strength 2873
APRES (Residential Schools)
Boys
No 3
Strength 1602
APRES (Residential Schools)
Girls
No 13
Strength 5653
Ashram Boys
No 1
Strength 110
Ashram Girls
No
Strength
Source: Handbook of Statistics, Anantapur District 2011
Consultations with the local community reported that both boys and girls are
encouraged to go to schools, as can be observed from the Table above.
Moreover, there was no drop-out rates reported at the villag schools. Local
NGOs such as Rural Development Trust is also facilitating the strengthening
of education systems in the district by building school infrastructures for
Government Schools and establishing alternate study centres for the weak
students and also the poor and marginalized sections of the society.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
131
Figure 5.31 A study centre run by RDT in one of the study area village
Source: ERM site visit, May2016
5.6.6 Land Profile
Land Use Classification
The existing land use of the study area as observed during the site visit and
stakeholder consultation process, falls under following mentioned categories
which are briefly described as follows;
Built up land: this includes primarily residential structures and other
existing structural area;
Crop land: this is inclusive of single kharif crop area and Rabi crop lands;
Double crop land: this includes area wherein double crops are grown in a
year;
Agriculture fallow land: this is the category of land which remains
temporarily unused with presently no cultivation being done;
Waste Land: this includes scrub land, gullied land and other fallow land
and barren land;
Water bodies: area covered under water bodies include pond, canal etc.
Other: other area primarily includes the area covered under agriculture
plantation.
Land use classification of the study area villages based on census 2001 data
have been captured in the Table 5.31 which is provided below. Land use
classification at village level is extracted from Village Directory (VD) Data of
Census of India, 2011. The data for only 8 villages were available in the Village
Directory.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
132
Table 5.31 Land use classification of villages under study area
Villages Mandal Total
Area
(in
hectare
s)
Fores
t area
(%)
Irrigate
d Area
(%)
Unirrigate
d area (%)
Culturabl
e waste
land (%)
Area not
available for
cultivation(
%)
Core Villages
Avulenna
Belugupp
a 995 3.3 1.3 91.7 1.9 0.6
Beluguppa
Belugupp
a 4335 3.6 0.8 90.6 1.4 2.6
Sreerangapuram
Belugupp
a 2505 0.0 3.0 88.7 0.4 6.7
Thagguparthy
Belugupp
a 2495 0.0 0.0 18.5 80.5 0.1
Yerragudi
Belugupp
a 1338 0.0 0.0 95.8 2.1 0.3
Buffer Villages
Ankampalle
Belugupp
a 2019 0 6.3 81.9 2.1 8.7
Duddekunta
Belugupp
a 2387 0 1.6 94.3 1.8 1.4
Hanakanahal Kanekal 3815 0 0.0 95.0 1.0 2.0
Kalekurthi Kanekal 1493 0 12.2 86.1 0.0 1.7
Narinjangundlapa
lle
Belugupp
a 961 12.8 3.1 79.0 0.8 2.7
Ratchumarri Kanekal 977 0 39.4 38.1 0.0 22.3
Seerpi
Belugupp
a 3566 0 2.0 87.8 5.1 3.9
Veparalla Raydurga 2794 0 6.3 81.9 2.1 8.7
Source: Village Directory, Census 2011 data
Land use classification based on census 2011 data shows that 83% of land in
the study area villages is unirrigated and the same has been confirmed during
community consultations that most of the agriculture in the study ismonsoon
dependent. The table also reveals that there are no forest land in the core area
villages, which supports the case that there are no forest land involved in the
project and therefore no forest dependent communities are being affected
because of this project. In the buffer area villages, only Narinjangundla village
has 12.8% of its land classified as forest area.
Land Holding Pattern
Landholding Census 2005 data for the study region classifies land holders in
five categories that are Marginal framers (having land holding upto 1 hectare),
Small farmers (having land holding between 1 to 2 hectare), Semi-medium
farmers (having land holding between 2 to 4 hectare), Medium farmers
(having landholding between 4 to 10 hectares) and Large Farmers (having
land holding above 10 hectares). Broad overview of land holding pattern of
the project study region based on Landholding Census 2005 is provided in the
Table 5.32
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
133
Table 5.32 Land holding pattern of the study region
Land holding category Anantapur Beluguppa
Marginal Farmers
(< 2.47 acres)
No of farmers (%) 34.5% 17.6%
Total Area (%) 10.0% 4.4%
Small Farmers
(2.47 to 4.93 acres)
No of farmers (%) 31.7% 32.2%
Total Area (%) 24.1% 17.8%
Semi-Medium Farmers
(4.93 to 9.87 acres)
No of farmers (%) 24.6% 32.4%
Total Area (%) 32.4% 30.5%
Medium Farmers
(9.88 to 24.70 acres)
No of farmers (%) 8.1% 15.0%
Total Area (%) 24.2% 32.7%
Large Farmers
No of farmers (%) 1.2% 2.8%
Total Area (%) 9.4% 14.6%
Total number of farmers 657615 11806
Total Area (In Hectare) 3137463 82713.71
Source: Landholdings 2005 Census as captured in Handbook of Statistics, Anantapur District 2011.
Project study area is primarily located in Beluguppa Mandal. Land holding
pattern of the Mandals shows that majority famers in these areas are small and
semi-medium categories of farmers. This trend of land holdings was also
validated through stakeholder consultation process including limited
community consultations in the project area. It was noticed that the
marginalised section of the villages like people from SC community, BC
community are mostly under marginal category. There is significant number
of landless families as well in these communities.
5.6.7 Occupation and Livelihood
Agriculture is the mainstay of the local economy of the study area.
Cultivators, agriculture labourers constitute significant proportion among the
various forms of occupation of the people in study area. Classification of
working population of the study region as well as of the study area as per
census 2011 data is presented in Figure 5.31.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
134
Table 5.33 Occupational pattern of the villages under study area
Study Region/
Study Area villages
Work
Particip
ation
Ratio
Main
Worker (1) %
Marginal
Worker (2
) %
Non –
Worker
%
CL (3) %
AL (4) %
HH (5) %
OW (6) %
Core Village
Avulenna 54.6 52.5 2.1 45.4 24.2 55.7 0.8 19.3
Beluguppa 48.9 35.3 13.6 51.1 23.5 42.5 3.8 30.2
Sreerangapuram 48.8 38.9 9.9 51.2 32.9 57.2 0.7 9.2
Thagguparthy 46.8 37.5 9.3 53.2 48.5 40.9 0.1 10.4
Yerragudi 64.9 64.8 0.1 35.1 17.6 80.2 0.4 1.8
Buffer Village
Ankampalle 61.5 46.2 15.3 38.5 53.4 0.1 9.5 15.3
Brahmanapalle 52.7 43.9 8.8 47.3 49.5 0.4 23.5 8.8
Duddekunta 56.3 42.7 13.6 43.7 52.7 2.1 12.9 13.6
Hanakanahal 54.2 47.1 7.1 45.8 44.5 1.5 16.2 7.1
Kalekurthi 58.7 52.7 6.0 41.3 63.3 3.0 11.7 6.0
Kasapuram 60.5 48.0 12.5 39.5 59.0 2.7 30.9 12.5
Narinjangundlapall
e
62.5 39.3 23.3 37.5 51.4 1.7 24.8 23.3
Ramapuram 60.5 58.7 1.9 39.5 53.4 0.7 11.9 1.9
Ratchumarri 60.7 44.8 15.9 39.3 48.5 0.6 5.4 15.9
Seerpi 59.4 49.6 9.9 40.6 60.0 2.2 8.4 9.9
Veparalla 62.0 55.5 6.5 38.0 70.4 0.2 7.7 6.5
Virupapuram 49.6 41.6 7.9 50.4 45.6 8.2 35.0 7.9
Source: Census 2011 Data
Note: WPR – Work Participation Ratio, CL – Cultivators, AL – Agriculture Labourer, HH –
Household Workers, OW – Other Workers.
Work Participation ratio (WPR) that is defined as percentage of total workers
including main and marginal workers out of the total population. The average
WPR of the study area is observed to be 56.6% which clearly indicates a huge
unmet demand for fulfilling economic needs. Sreerangapuram at 46.8% has
the lowest WPR among the study area villages.
(1) Main Workers are those workers who had worked for the major part of the reference period (i.e. 6 months or more) (2) Marginal Workers are those workers who have not worked for major portion of reference period (i.e. less than 6
months). (3) Cultivator is person engaged in cultivation of land owned or held from Government or held from private persons or
institution for payment in money, kind or share. Cultivation includes effective supervision or direction in cultivation. A
person who has given out her/his land to another person or persons or institution for cultivation for money, kind or share
of crop and who does not even supervise or direct cultivation in exchange of land, is not treated as cultivator. Similarly, a
person working on another person's land for wages in cash or kind or a combination of both (agricultural labourer) are not
treated as cultivator.
(4) A person who works on another person’s land for wages in money, or kind or share is regarded as agriculture labourer.
He or she has no risk in the cultivation, but merely works on another person’s land for wages. An agriculture labourer has
no right of lease or contract on which she or he works. (5) Household industry is defined as an industry being run by one or more member of a household at home or within
village in rural areas and only within the precincts of the house where the household lives in urban areas. The larger
proportion of workers in the household industry consists of members of household. The industry is not run on the scale of
a registered factory which would qualify or has to be registered under the Indian Factories Act. (6) All workers i.e. those who have engaged in some economic activity during the last one year, but are not cultivators or
agriculture labourers or in household industry are 'Other Workers’.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
135
Figure 5.32 Distribution of main working population in the study area
Other noticeable aspects (as evident in the Table 5.33) is that proportion of
Agriculture Labourer (AL) is relatively high in all the study area villages. On
an average almost a third of the main workers are cultivators, while 53 percent
of main workers in the study area are agricultural labourers.
.
Cropping Pattern, Intensity and Productivity
As seen in the above sections, economy of the district and the study area is principally agrarian with almost nil industrial sector. Anantapur receives very less rainfall due to its location in the rain shadow area of Indian Peninsula and the average annual rainfall is about 550 mm.
Agrarian Crisis in the District and Farmer Suicides Anantapur has a long history of agricultural stress being a dry area. However, the last decade has been witness to a spate of farmer suicides owing to a mix of crop failure due to bud necrosis and rising input costs of agriculture, mainly increase in power tariffs. Irregular and scanty rainfalls in the last two years were cited during the consultation and there have been no agricultural activities in the last two years in few of the villages in the study area. According to a news report1 in the Hindu there were no fewer than 150 suicides-farmers and weavers combined in the last year alone in the district. Since the non-farm livelihood opportunities are limited, the young men have to resort to agriculture. So another dimension to the agrarian crisis is that young men who have taken to agriculture are unable to find brides and they also have to bear the ignominy of being unable to provide a better life to their spouses, if married.
Kharif is the major crop season in Anantapur District. Of the 9.75-lakh hectares of gross cropped area in the district in 2006–07, 7.94-lakh hectares,
1 http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/andhra-pradesh/agrarian-crisis-anantapur-registers-150-
suicides/article8015557.ece
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
136
that is, 81 percent of gross cropped area gets cultivated during the kharif season1.
Varieties of pulses are grown during the Rabi season in the study area.
Ground nut is the most grown crop during Kharif season. Other crops grown
during Kharif season however in lower intensity includes paddy, horse gram,
red gram, sun chillies etc. It has been observed that irrigated area is cultivated
with paddy, sunflower, groundnut and fruits, in that order.
A report1 by MS Swaminathan Research Foundation shows that in Anantpur district expansion of groundnut has been at the expense of millets. The report states that minor millets have more or less disappeared from cultivation, while the area under major millets has reduced by 90 percent.
Productivity: Agriculture productively has been severely affected owing to
area being drought prone zone over the previous many years. As reported in
local community consultation, it was revealed that average production of the
ground nut and Bengal gram (key cash crops of the study area) used to be
3000 bags and 2000 bags per acre of land respectively. One bag for ground nut
and Bengal gram is locally assumed to be equivalent to 42 kg and 60 kg
respectively. Now the production level as claimed by local people has come
to down to 1400-1500 bags per acre of land for ground nut and 1200-1300 bags
per acre of land for Bengal gram. This sharp decline in agriculture yield is
largely attributed to poor rain fall over the previous years as well as lack of
access to alternate irrigation facilities in the area.
Planning commission of India has initiated a mega project for bringing
transformation in livelihood pattern in drought prone district of Anantapur.
Detail is provided in the Box 5.1.
1 http://www.mssrf.org/sites/default/files/Study-of-Anantapur-RR10-24.pdf
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
137
Box 5.1 'Project Ananta' - A mega project launched by Planning Commission of India
for District Anantapur
Private initiatives are also being developed to save the agricultural economy
of the district. Anantapur now has numerous farmers’ co-operative societies
that work together to revive traditional crops and farming methods.
Organic farming co-operatives and revival of traditional food grains Concern about the grim agricultural situation in Anantapur is on the rise, with increasing farmer suicides in the area. Anantapur has increasingly becoming a mono crop district, in this case groundnut and this is being cited as one of the reasons for the current agricultural crisis. During ERM consultations with the elderly population group in the study area, they reminisce that driven by fertiliser subsidies, seed inventory and market pressure, farmers in the region abandoned growing local grains and millets that were not only drought resistant but also required less water and fertiliser inputs. They also cite health benefits of consuming locally grown millets as compared to the high input paddy. Small farmers found themselves trapped in a cycle of supplied high-breed seeds, chemical fertilisers and pesticides at subsidy rates which they required repeatedly as the soil’s nutrition diminished. The import of cheap palm oil meant bad prices for their crop, adding to their misery. The farmer had also become dependent on his trader and groundnut mill owner. With the entire local system – marketing, credit, insurance, inputs, production know-how and social support built around one crop, he was forced to grow only that. However, few Farmers’ Co-operative initiatives such as Timbaktu collective is reviving millet crops as well as the traditional agricultural practices such as Navadanya. They state the direct health benefits to the farmers families in growing millets. The community also help farmers own cows for non-chemical farming, provide financial and helps form thrift-banking womens co-operatives.
Source: (i) http://www.thealternative.in/business/the-future-local-series-how-timbaktus-farmers-got-
earth-to-meet-sky/?print=print
(ii) http://www.timbaktu.org/our-programmes/ecology/organic-farming/
Planning commission of India has approved ‘Project Ananta’ valued at INR 7630 crore for
enhancing transformation in agriculture sector of Anantapur District. The project is designed
designed after the submission of a report by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR)
after extensively touring the district, taking into consideration the topography, climate and
available resources. A five year action plan document by District Magistrate of Anantapur is in
place (Refer link http://www.apard.gov.in/project-anantha/Anantha.pdf for detail). Key
objectives as laid down in the documents include;
1) Enhancing the productivity of ground nut, the largest rain fed crop in the district;
2) Institutionalising seed chain management
3) Diversion from Paddy to irrigated dry crops/arid horticulture;
4) Varietal shifts of various crops;
5) Research backstopping;
6) Value addition to farmer’s produce;
7) Promote minor millets and pulses;
8) Encourage cluster bean/ Gaur cultivation;
9) Eliminate Banana and oil palm from district;
10) Efficient management of rain water received through scanty precipitation;
11) Relooking at milch animal and sheep rearing as the most promising alternative;
12) Enhance area under silvopasture and social forestry;
13) Make sericulture more profitable through market intervention;
14) Enhancing marketing prospects of agriculture produce.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
138
Agriculture Labour
The occupational pattern of the study area villages as presented in Table 5.33
shows that working population in most of study area villages are mostly
agriculture labour who works on other’s field at certain wage rate mutually
negotiated between cultivator and agriculture worker. Another important
aspect as observed during community consultation is that agriculture workers
mostly belong to the SC and BC community. The wage rate per day for
agriculture worker in study area is reported to vary between INR 150 to INR
200.
Livestock based livelihood
Common livestock in study area includes rearing cows, buffalos and hens.
Certain families are involved in trading of the products gained from livestock
like selling milk, eggs, chicken etc; however it is practised at small scale and
usually limited to village boundary. There are certain communities in the
study area like Koroba and Boya community, which is specifically engaged in
sheep and goat rearing. They usually sell these at local market of the Mandals.
Non-Farm based livelihood
Non- farm based livelihood as presented in Table 5.33 under the categories of
HH workers and other workers represent that its proportion is relatively very
less. Other livelihood opportunities as identified during stakeholder
consultations include petty shops in village, working as construction labour,
government jobs etc.
There is no industry in the study area except for few Wind Farm projects.
Therefore wind farms are good employment opportunity for local people
during construction phases. Locals are also observed to be recruited as
security staffs in the existing wind farm projects in the area. Sizeable
population across the HHs were reported to be working outside district.
With virtually no other non-farm livelihoods, Anantapur backwardness and
poverty are well indicated in its severe rural indebtedness, high turn up of
labour under MGNREGS, rampant farmer’s migration including seasonal
migration and a high number of farmer's suicides in the country.
Lack of means of livelihood forcing Anantapur women into Prostitution
A recent article in one of the News media, reports that a number of women are either resorting
to or falling prey to prostitution due lack of agricultural activity and absence of alternate
income sources. An NGO, Rural Development Society in Kadiri is striving to tackle the issue by
spreading awareness among locals about employment agents operating in the area who might
be involved in such crimes. They are acquainting women with alternate business possibilities
and providing financial help. This indicates to a desperate need for reviving the farm economy
or providing alternate sources of income in the study area.
Source: http://www.news18.com/news/india/no-means-of-livelihood-women-forced-into-prostitution-in-
andhras-anantpur-1247041.html
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
139
5.6.8 Drinking Water Supply
The Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Department is nodal agency in the
State of Andhra Pradesh for providing drinking water and Sanitation facilities
in rural areas under RWS sector. The villages under Beluguppa Mandal are
provided water supply by RWS Sub-division Beluguppa. The RWS
department provides drinking water facilities under different arrangement
depending upon geographic location of the villages. Some of the possible
arrangements as reported in the villages are:
Spot sources (Bore Wells fitted with Hand Pumps);
Protected Water Supply (PWS) Schemes for one habitation/village;
Comprehensive Protected Water Supply (CPWS) Schemes for a group of
habitations/ villages
Earlier consultations of ERM with other RWS sub-division in the district
revealed that average water supply in rural areas is only 70 Litres per Capita
per Day (LPCD). However, Government mechanism for supply is reportedly
not adequate in significant areas of study region. Another water supply
arrangement in study region is observed to be Shri. Satya Saibaba Water
Supply scheme which is one of the most common schemes used to supply
water to these villages suffering from acute shortage of safe drinking water. In
this scheme, either water is diverted from the Tunghabadra dam project to
villages through canals or bore wells have been dug and water is pumped to
overhead tanks to 4-5 tap points in the villages. However, water is so scarce in
the area that, most villages get water only for 2-3 hours a day if they have tube
wells. In other villages water reaches them only once in 2-3 days for few
hours.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
140
Figure 5.33 Water Supply sources in the study area
Source: ERM site visit, May2016
Table 5.34 Drinking water source availability
Villages Sources of available drinking water
Core Villages
Avulenna Tap water, Hand pump
Beluguppa Tap water, Hand pump
Sreerangapuram Tap water, Hand pump
Thagguparthy Tap water, Hand pump
Yerragudi Tap water, Hand pump
Buffer Villages
Ankampalle Tap water, Hand pump Duddekunta Tap water, Hand pump Hanakanahal Tap water, Hand pump Kalekurthi Tap water, Hand pump Narinjangundlapalle Tap water, Hand pump Ratchumarri Tap water, Hand pump Seerpi Tap water, Hand pump Veparalla Tap water, Hand pump, Pond
Source: Village Directory, Census 2001 data
Mostly study area villages as per Table 5.34 are equipped with Tap water
which indicates that they are provided with PWS or CPWS scheme. Hand
pump is another most common source of water among the study area villages.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
141
5.6.9 Irrigation
Anantapur District is declared as drought-prone zone by government of India.
There are no perennial rivers in the district and the three main non-perennial
rivers are Pennar, Chithravathi and Vedavathi. Irrigation facilities in study
area seem to be limited as farmers reported to be entirely dependent upon rain
water for irrigating their field. Use of drift irrigation, sprinklers etc by
sourcing water from privately owned well, tube wells were observed to be
other medium of irrigation; however it is restricted to few famers only. This
observation can be corroborated with information on Rabi and Kharif season
cropping pattern which suggests that very little proportion of irrigated
cropped area compare to unirrigated cropped area in the study area.
Enumerating the water bodies in the District ‘In the year 2004, the District Collector of Anantapur district initiated a survey to identify the number of water bodies that existed in the district. The survey identified a total of 5,824 water bodies in the entire district14. Of this, 1,373 are big tanks with an average ayacut of above 100 acre; 2094 are small tanks with an ayacut of 10 acre; and 203 are spring channels. The survey found that only about one-fourth of the identified water bodies, that is, around 1500, were functional at the time of the survey. (Kadalika,2004). This survey clearly indicated that while the earlier rulers had recognised the importance of constructing large number of small water bodies in a rain-shadow region such as Anantapur, the modern state, by promoting private irrigation over community-based irrigation systems, has contributed towards the destruction of the indigenous rain water harvesting and management systems that prevailed in the region.’
Source: (i) Designing Rural Technology Delivery Systems for Mitigating Agricultural Distress:
A study of Anantpur District, MS Swaminathan Research Foundation
(ii) http://www.mssrf.org/sites/default/files/Study-of-Anantapur-RR10-24.pdf
Therefore, the study area presents an opportunity for rain water harvesting
interventions and also for boosting low water, low input traditional food
grains.
Integrated Watershed Development Programme (IWMP) funded jointly by
department of Rural development, Government of India and Government of
Andhra Pradesh is also being implemented in the District in all micro
watershed villages.
5.6.10 Health Infrastructure
Health care infrastructure of the study region is captured in the table provided
below:
Table 5.35 Health care facilities in study region
Study Region Hospitals PHC Govt. Dispensaries Others total
Anantapur district 19 80 0 19 118
Beluguppa Mandal 0 1 0 0 1
Source: Handbook of Statistics, Anantapur District 2011.
The Mandal has one Primary Health Centre (PHC) and has 6 sub-centres
under it. Beluguppa Mandal covers 28 villages in the area. The PHC caters to
the health care requirement for mostly people of the study area. No alternate
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
142
medical practices were also available in the study are as reported during ERM
consultations.
The study area is serviced by the 104 dial-in mobile heath service where the
PHC facility cannot be extended and the 108 dial-in ambulance service. Both
are Public Private Partnership (PPP) initiatives in the State.
Figure 5.34 Health facilities in the study area (a) PHC at Beluguppa b) RDT Hospital at
Venkatadiripilli
Source: ERM Site Visit, May 2016.
Some of the prevailing health issues reported by the Medical Officer in the area are nutrient
deficiency, alcoholism and smoking and lifestyle diseases such as diabetes and hypertension.
Numerous cases of dog bites and snake bites were also reported.
Through the PHC, the necessary provisions for local Anganwadis are also
being provided. As part of maternal care, pre-natal and post-natal women
receive 3 kg rice, half kg dal half kg oil and 16 eggs in a moth from the village
Anganwadi centres free of cost.
The study area also has an 8 bed hospital run by Rural Development Trust
(RDT) at Venkatadiripilli, one of the prominent NGOs based out of Anantpur
which serves 4-5 villages in the area.
For bigger ailments, the local community reported consulting at RDT Hospital
or Community Health Centre at Kalyandurga.
5.6.11 Others physical infrastructure
Access to Toilets
During consultations, it was understood that open defecation is still prevalent
in the area. Only 10-25% of the households in the study area villages reported
to have toilets. Consultations with women groups indicated that this is one of
the concern areas for them.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
143
Road & Transportation
Mostly villages in the study area had poor village roads and did not have bus
connectivity. For the local transportation, use of shared auto rickshaw is very
common in the study area.
Electricity
Each village of the study area has access to electricity supply in the village.
Mostly households were reported to be connected with existing electricity
supply network.
Postal Service, Bank, Telecommunication
All the villages in the study area are serviced by postal department. Banking
facility is not available within village premise in any of the study area villages.
Banks located in Mandal centre serves mostly rural population. Mobile phone
is the prominent source of telecommunication in the villages under study area.
5.6.12 Civil Society Organisations
There are several civil society organisations operating in the district, some of
them being popular for their work in the fields of education, water shed
management, women empowerment etc. Some of the key NGOs in the area
include Rural Development Trust, Accion Fraterna and MASS to name a few,
Suzlon is in partnership with few of the NGOs in the area for their ongoing
CSR activities for their other projects.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
144
6 STAKEHOLDER MAPPING AND IDENTIFICATION
6.1 INTRODUCTION
This section profiles the key stakeholders for the Project and assesses their potential concerns and levels of influence. The project proponents have developed a mechanism by which most of the key stakeholders (internal and external) are informed about the project development and its status.
6.2 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION AND DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT FOR THE
PROJECT
The disclosure of project information and consultations with stakeholders has been increasingly emphasised by project finance institutions and government regulatory bodies. A brief overview of the requirements of public disclosure and stakeholder consultation applicable to this project is provided in the table below (Table 6.1).
Table 6.1 Overview of Disclosure and stakeholder consultation requirement
Institution/ Regulatory Body
Reference Regulation/ Standard
Requirements
IFC PS-1 Community engagement is to be undertaken with the affected communities and must be free of external manipulation, interference, or coercion, and intimidation.
Furthermore, in situations where an affected community may be subject to risks or adverse impacts from a project, the proponent must undertake a process of consultation so as to provide the affected communities with an opportunity to express their views on the project risks, impacts, and mitigation measures, as well as allow the proponents to consider and respond to them.
Informed participation: For projects with significant adverse impacts on affected communities, the consultation process must ensure that free, prior and informed consultation with affected communities occurs and that processes exist to facilitate participation by those affected.
Apart from such a consultation process, the project proponents are also to establish a Grievance Redressal Mechanism, which will allow the affected communities’ concerns and grievances about the project proponent’s environmental and social performance to be received and allow for steps to be taken to resolve the same
Broader stakeholder engagement: The proponent must identify and engage with stakeholders that are not directly affected by the Project but those that have established relationships with local communities and/or interest in the Project – local government, civil society organizations, etc. – and establish a dialogue.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
145
6.3 STAKEHOLDER CATEGORISATION
A stakeholder is “a person, group, or organization that has a direct or indirect stake in a project/organization because it can affect or be affected by the Project/organization's actions, objectives, and policies”. Stakeholders thus vary in terms of degree of interest, influence and control they have over the project. While those stakeholders who have a direct impact on or are directly impacted by the project are known as Primary Stakeholders, those who have an indirect impact or are indirectly impacted are known as Secondary Stakeholders. Keeping in mind the nature of the project and its setting, the stakeholders have been identified and listed in the table given below (Table 6.2).
Table 6.2 Stakeholder Group categorisation
Stakeholder Groups Primary Stakeholders Secondary Stakeholders
Community Land Sellers
Sub-contractors
Local Labourers
Local community
Agricultural Labourers
Vulnerable Community
Institutional Stakeholders Gram Panchayats
Project investors (IFC)
Political Parties
Government Bodies Regulatory Authorities;
District Administration
Other Groups Media
Other industries
6.4 APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY FOR STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS
The significance of a stakeholder group is categorised considering the
magnitude of impact (type, extent, duration, scale, frequency) or degree of
influence (power, proximity) of a stakeholder group and urgency/likelihood
of the impact/influence associated with the particular stakeholder group in
the project context. The magnitude of stakeholder impact/influence is
assessed taking the power/responsibility (1) and proximity (2) of the
stakeholder group and is categorised as negligible, small, medium and large.
The urgency or likelihood of the impact on/influence by the stakeholder is
assessed in a scale of low, medium and high. The overall significance of the
stakeholder group is assessed as per the matrix provided below:
Table 6.3 Stakeholder Significance and Engagement Requirement
Magnitude of Influence/ Impact
Urgency/Likelihood of Influence on/by Stakeholder
Low Medium High
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Small Negligible Minor Moderate
Medium Minor Moderate Urgent
Large Moderate Urgent Urgent
(1) Power/Responsibility: Those stakeholders to whom the organisation has, or in the future may have, legal, financial, and
operational responsibilities in the form of regulations, contracts, policies or codes of practice. (2) Proximity: indicates stakeholders that the organisation interacts with most, including internal stakeholders, those with
long-standing relationships and those the organisation depends on its day-to-day operations.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
146
6.5 STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS
Stakeholder analysis for the identified stakeholders is being detailed in Table
6.4.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
147
Table 6.4 Assessing significance of stakeholder for the Project
Stakeholder Category
Relevant Stakeholders
Profile/Status Magnitude of Influence/Impact (Negligible, Small, Medium, Large)
Urgency/ Likelihood of Influence (Low, Medium, High)
Overall Rating of Stakeholder Influence
Primary
stakeholder
Land Sellers Medium and large farmers who owned single crop land.
Majority of the land sellers are reported to be medium and semi-medium farmers, having adequate balance land holding after land sell to the project
Although land is an important asset, its economic value is limited due to low productivity and dependence on rainfall.
The market price of the crops has been falling while the input price has been soaring, thereby making agriculture less viable.
People are willing sellers of land. They have received more than the market price for their land.
Reportedly, none of them have become landless.
People are reportedly utilizing the money received after land sell for further land purchase in the region.
Selling land is considered an opportunity to liquidate their assets.
Land procurement process provides an opportunity to land seller to refuse in case they are not willing to sell land.
Decline in land holding size of the farmers until money received out of land sale is reinvested by farmers for further land bank.
Medium The land
purchase process
has been
completed for the
project
Land sellers are
by are large
happy with the
procurement
process
There is
reportedly little
variation in land
price offered and
negotiated with
land owners for
similar type of
land
Medium Moderate
Local
Labourers
Local area is having adequate
workforce in unskilled and skilled
category as mostly working
population of the local area are
agriculture labourer
In absence of any industry nearby,
mostly people have to stick to
agricultural activity
Employment opportunities
generated during construction
phase have attracted local workers
Mostly employment
opportunities for local
people would be limited
during till construction
phase is over.
The employment
opportunities could be
in form of requirement
for construction labour,
vending opportunities
like vehicle hiring,
Small The local wage earners have high expectation of employment from the project.
The local availability of wage earners is linked to the agricultural season.
Medium Minor
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
148
Stakeholder Category
Relevant Stakeholders
Profile/Status Magnitude of Influence/Impact (Negligible, Small, Medium, Large)
Urgency/ Likelihood of Influence (Low, Medium, High)
Overall Rating of Stakeholder Influence
tractors hiring, food
item supply to labour
colony etc.
The operational phase
would be have very
limited opportunity for
employment of local
people and this is
expected to be for
requirement of security
personnel
Gram Panchayats
The Sarpanch of the GPs are aware and efficient.
The participation of the people on local governance is satisfactory as regular Gram Sabhas are held.
GPs play active role in execution of development programs in their village
The GPs have issued NoC for establishing Windfarm.
The GP has authority to restrict the land-use and resource utilization within the area of their jurisdiction.
Medium GPs need to work out a mechanism for cooperation for future CSR activities in the area by Suzlon
Medium Moderate
Regulatory Authorities;
The primary regulator for wind energy project in Andhra Pradesh is New and Renewable Energy Development Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Ltd. (NREDCAP) and IREDA at National level.
Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board.
The office of District Industries Commissioner regulates the Industrialization at the District Level.
The project requires complying with the guidelines of NREDCAP and IREDA as sector regulators.
The project needs permission and coordination with the DIC for local infrastructure and other supports required for smooth industrial operation.
Medium The project has obtained necessary permits and approvals from relevant authorities
Medium Moderate
District
/Mandal
Administration
The revenue department (sub registrar) is responsible for registration of land sale, mutation, updating and records and transfer
The construction phase requires a number of permissions and support from the local
Medium Suzlon has already registered the lands after mutation in the
Medium Moderate
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
149
Stakeholder Category
Relevant Stakeholders
Profile/Status Magnitude of Influence/Impact (Negligible, Small, Medium, Large)
Urgency/ Likelihood of Influence (Low, Medium, High)
Overall Rating of Stakeholder Influence
of land.
Issues NA permission for change in land
The village secretary, land surveyor plays a significant role as land survey and record keeping.
The District Collector is overall responsible for protection and maintenance of peace in area.
administration.
The procedural complication can cause significant project delay.
The land-matters can give rise to unnecessary litigations.
land records and obtaining the CLU
Secondary
Stakeholders
Local community
The study area falls in one of the most impoverished regions of Andhra Pradesh with frequent occurrence of droughts, minimal industrialization and seasonal migration.
Large numbers of people are from
Backward Caste (BC) and
Scheduled Caste (SC) community.
The local population has high expectation on getting employment opportunity from the project. However they are being informed by the project personnel that there would be very limited scope for employment opportunities during operational phase of the project.
The rain-fed agriculture
provides them limited
return
Small Concerned about
safety due to
plying of heavy
vehicles in their
area.
Concerned about
loss of standing
crops due to
movement of
labours and
equipment close
by their field
Want preference in
employment
opportunities
generated by the
project
Medium Minor
Agricultural Labourers
Since dependence on agriculture is reducing, there is increased migration to other cities and towns. Locals are keen on labour work and NREGS constitutes an important source of income
All project land is
located on private land
of the locals and that are
largely rain fed area.
Medium The agriculture labourers have the opportunity as Daily wage labours during construction phase.
The local sub-contractors have engaged \ local abourers,
Low Minor
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
150
Stakeholder Category
Relevant Stakeholders
Profile/Status Magnitude of Influence/Impact (Negligible, Small, Medium, Large)
Urgency/ Likelihood of Influence (Low, Medium, High)
Overall Rating of Stakeholder Influence
Vulnerable
Community
Significant percentage of the people in study area are from backward community (BC). Percentage of SC group is also quite visible. Golla, Korba, Vadde, Cheneta, Gboya, Lingayats, Chakali, Jangama community the BC community living in study areas.
The area has a large proportion of BPL families.
Women have very limited livelihood opportunities.
The employment opportunities available to them will be for short term only.
Small The study area population is likely to get only short term benefit of employment in construction phase.
The operational phase would have very limited job opportunity like few security personnel.
Medium Minor
Other
industries
No other major industry is reported to come up in the project area.
There are wind farm project in the study region as well.
Study region is slowly become hub of wind farm projects
There are limited presence of Small and Micro Enterprises in the area.
Negligible The land price
paid by other
wind farm project
in the region
might set a bar in
negotiation for the
project. Land
aggregator needs
to have close
watch on the
compensation rate
being offered for
other wind farm
project in the
region
Medium Minor
Political
Parties
The project is located in an area which is reported to be an overlooked constituency.
District headquarter of Anantapur is witnessing lot of protest by political parties these days on the issue of bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh state.
The dominant political Party like Congress, TDP, YSR Congress is reported to have a strong hold in project area.
Local representatives of political parties often seek financial
Medium Suzlon is in the process of identifying the local requirements and has good coordination with local political leaders.
Low Negligible
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
151
Stakeholder Category
Relevant Stakeholders
Profile/Status Magnitude of Influence/Impact (Negligible, Small, Medium, Large)
Urgency/ Likelihood of Influence (Low, Medium, High)
Overall Rating of Stakeholder Influence
contribution to party fund from the projects and industries located in the region
Media The nearest town Kalyandurg and district headquarter of Anantapur has presence of all major Telugu News Papers including an English newspaper ‘The Hindu’ which is in circulation in entire southern region of India .
The media coverage of water scarcity and droughts is considerable.
Small The local media has been active on the impact of the drought in project area. Hence, there is a significant attention on water resources and its usage in project area.
Medium Minor
Civil Society The civil society includes NGOs, SHGs and other Cooperative Societies functioning in project area.
Sri Satya Saibaba Trust
was reported to be key
player in supplying safe
drinking water for many
villages in study region.
There is considerable presence of NGOs in the area
Medium Suzlon would be partnering with few key local NGOs like RDT, MASS and Vision Spring for their CSR activities
Medium Medium
Note: It is significant to note that the stakeholder analysis is based on the current situation. The stakeholder influence on the project is dynamic and may
change during the project life. Consequently, the stakeholder analysis needs periodical reassessment and updating.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
152
The summary of stakeholder influence has been elaborated in Table 6.5
Table 6.5 Summary of overall stakeholder influence
Stakeholder Category
Relevant Stakeholders
Magnitude of Influence/Impact
Urgency/ Likelihood of Influence
Overall Rating of Stakeholder Influence
Primary
stakeholder
Land Sellers Medium Medium Moderate
Contractors/Sub-contractors
Medium Medium Moderate
Local Labourers Small Medium Minor
Gram Panchayats Medium Low Minor
Project investors Medium Medium Moderate
Regulatory Authorities;
Medium Medium Moderate
District /Mandal
Administration
Medium Medium Moderate
Secondary
Stakeholders
Local community Small Medium Minor
Agricultural Labourers Medium Low Minor
Vulnerable
Community
Small Medium Minor
Other industries Negligible Medium Minor
Political Parties Medium Low Negligible
Media Small Medium Minor
Civil Society Negligible Medium Negligible
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
153
7 IMPACT ASSESSMENT
7.1 INTRODUCTION
This section assesses the manner in which the Project will interact with
elements of the physical, ecological or social environment to produce impacts
to resources/ receptors. It has been organized as per the various phases of the
project life cycle to understand the risks and impacts associated with each
phase.
7.2 SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT
The scope of the assessment captures the understanding on the envisaged
risks and impacts assessed during the scoping exercise of this impact
assessment study as well as the risks identified during subsequent physical
baseline assessment and impact evaluation process. The key environmental
and social issues and risks identified are further elaborated in the following
sections.
7.3 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
Impact identification and assessment starts with scoping and continues
through the remainder of the IA Process. The principal IA steps are
summarized in Figure 7.1 and comprises of
Impact prediction: to determine what could potentially happen to
resources/receptors as a consequence of the Project and its associated
activities.
Impact evaluation: to evaluate the significance of the predicted impacts by
considering their magnitude and likelihood of occurrence, and the
sensitivity, value and/or importance of the affected resource/receptor.
Mitigation and enhancement: to identify appropriate and justified
measures to mitigate negative impacts and enhance positive impacts.
Residual impact evaluation: to evaluate the significance of impacts
assuming effective implementation of mitigation and enhancement
measures.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
154
Figure 7.1 Impact Assessment Process
Prediction of Impacts
Prediction of impacts was carried out with an objective to determine what is
likely to happen to the environment as a consequence of the Project and its
associated activities. From the potentially significant interactions identified in
Scoping, the impacts to the various resources/receptors were elaborated and
evaluated.
Evaluation of Impacts
Each impact was described in terms of its various relevant characteristics (e.g.,
type, scale, duration, frequency, extent). The terminology used to describe
impact characteristics is shown in Table 7.1.
Table 7.1 Impact Characteristic Terminology
Characteristic Definition Designations
Type A descriptor indicating the relationship of the
impact to the Project (in terms of cause and
effect)
Direct
Indirect
Induced
Extent The “reach” of the impact (e.g., confined to a
small area around the Project Footprint,
projected for several kilometres, etc.)
Local
National
Global
Duration The time period over which a resource/
receptor is affected.
Temporary
Short-term
Long-term
Permanent
Scale The size of the impact (e.g., the size of the area
damaged or impacted, the fraction of a
resource that is lost or affected, etc.)
[no fixed designations;
intended to be a numerical
value or a qualitative
description of “intensity”]
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
155
Characteristic Definition Designations
Frequency A measure of the constancy or periodicity of
the impact.
[no fixed designations;
intended to be a numerical
value or a qualitative
description]
The definitions for the type designations are given in Table 7.2. Definitions for
the other designations are resource/receptor-specific.
Table 7.2 Impact Type Definitions
Type Definition
Direct Impacts that result from a direct interaction between the Project and a
resource/ receptor
Indirect Impacts that follow on from the direct interactions between the Project and its
environment as a result of subsequent interactions within the environment
Induced Impacts that result from other activities (which are not part of the Project) that
happen as a consequence of the Project.
The above characteristics and definitions apply to planned and unplanned
events. An additional characteristic that pertains only to unplanned events is
likelihood. The likelihood of an unplanned event occurring was designated
using a qualitative scale, as described in Table 7.3.
Table 7.3 Definitions for Likelihood Designations
Likelihood Definition
Unlikely The event is unlikely but may occur at some time during normal operating
conditions (probability less than 20%)
Possible The event is likely to occur at some time during normal operating conditions
(probability greater than 20% and less than 50%)
Likely The event will occur during normal operating conditions (probability greater
than 50%
Once an impact’s characteristics were defined, each impact was assigned a
‘magnitude’. Magnitude is typically a function of a combination (depending
on the resource/receptor in question) of the following impact characteristics:
Extent
Duration
Scale
Frequency
In case of unplanned events only, magnitude incorporates the ‘likelihood’
factor discussed above. Magnitude essentially describes the intensity of the
change that was predicted to occur in the resource/receptor as a result of the
impact. As discussed above, the magnitude designations themselves are
universally consistent, but the descriptions for these designations vary on a
resource/receptor-by-resource/receptor basis. The universal magnitude
designations are:
Positive
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
156
Negligible
Small
Medium
Large
In the case of a positive impact, no magnitude designation (aside from
‘positive’) was assigned. It was considered sufficient for the purpose of the IA
to indicate that the Project was expected to result in a positive impact, without
characterising the exact degree of positive change likely to occur. In the case of
impacts resulting from unplanned events, the same resource/ receptor-
specific approach to concluding a magnitude designation was followed, but
the ‘likelihood’ factor was considered, together with the other impact
characteristics, when assigning a magnitude designation.
In addition to characterising the magnitude of impact, the other principal
impact evaluation step was definition of the sensitivity/ vulnerability/
importance of the impacted resource/receptor. There are a range of factors
that was taken into account when defining the sensitivity/ vulnerability/
importance of the resource/receptor, which may be physical, biological,
cultural or human. Other factors were also considered when characterising
sensitivity/ vulnerability/importance, such as legal protection, government
policy, stakeholder views and economic value. The sensitivity/
vulnerability/importance designations used herein for all resources/receptors
are:
Low
Medium
High
Once magnitude of impact and sensitivity/ vulnerability/ importance of
resource/ receptor have been characterised, the significance was assigned for
each impact. Impact significance is designated using the matrix shown in
Figure 7.2.
Figure 7.2 Impact Significance
Sensitivity/Vulnerability/importance of Resource/Receptor
Low Medium High
Mag
nit
ud
e o
f Im
pac
t
Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible
Small Negligible Minor Moderate
Medium Minor Moderate Major
Large Moderate Major Major
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
157
Source: The ERM Impact Assessment Standard. v1
The matrix applies universally to all resources/receptors, and all impacts to
these resources/receptors, as the resource/receptor-specific considerations are
factored into the assignment of magnitude and sensitivity/ vulnerability/
importance designations that enter into the matrix. Box 7.1 provides a context
of what the various impact significance ratings imply.
Box 7.1 Context of Impact Significances
It is important to note that impact prediction and evaluation takes into
account any embedded controls (i.e., physical or procedural controls that are
already planned as part of the Project design, regardless of the results of the
IA Process).
Identification of Mitigation and Enhancement Measures
Once the significance of an impact has been characterised, the next step was to
evaluate what mitigation and enhancement measures are warranted. For the
purposes of this impact assessment, the consulting firm adopted the following
Mitigation Hierarchy:
Avoid at Source, Reduce at Source: avoiding or reducing at source
through the design of the Project.
Abate on Site: add something to the design to abate the impact.
Abate at Receptor: if an impact cannot be abated on-site then control
measures can be implemented off-site.
An impact of negligible significance is one where a resource/ receptor (including people) will
essentially not be affected in any way by a particular activity or the predicted effect is deemed
to be ‘imperceptible’ or is indistinguishable from natural background variations.
An impact of minor significance is one where a resource/ receptor will experience a noticeable
effect, but the impact magnitude is sufficiently small and/or the resource/receptor is of low
sensitivity/ vulnerability/ importance. In either case, the magnitude should be well within
applicable standards/ guidelines.
An impact of moderate significance has an impact magnitude that is within applicable
standards/guidelines, but falls somewhere in the range from a threshold below which the
impact is minor, up to a level that might be just short of breaching a legal limit. Clearly, to
design an activity so that its effects only just avoid breaking a law and/or cause a major impact
is not best practice. The emphasis for moderate impacts is therefore on demonstrating that the
impact has been reduced to a level that is as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP). This does
not necessarily mean that impacts of moderate significance have to be reduced to minor, but
that moderate impacts are being managed effectively and efficiently.
An impact of major significance is one where an accepted limit or standard may be exceeded, or
large magnitude impacts occur to highly valued/sensitive resource/receptors. An aim of IA is
to get to a position where the Project does not have any major residual impacts, certainly not
ones that would endure into the long-term or extend over a large area. However, for some
aspects there may be major residual impacts after all practicable mitigation options have been
exhausted (i.e. ALARP has been applied). An example might be the visual impact of a facility. It
is then the function of regulators and stakeholders to weigh such negative factors against the
positive ones, such as employment, in coming to a decision on the Project.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
158
Repair or Remedy: some impacts involve unavoidable damage to a
resource (e.g. agricultural land and forestry due to creating access, work
camps or materials storage areas) and these impacts can be addressed
through repair, restoration or reinstatement measures.
Compensate in Kind, Compensate Through Other Means: where other
mitigation approaches are not possible or fully effective, then
compensation for loss, damage and disturbance might be appropriate (e.g.,
planting to replace damaged vegetation, financial compensation for
damaged crops or providing community facilities for loss of fisheries,
access, recreation and amenity space).
The priority in mitigation was to first apply mitigation measures to the source
of the impact (i.e., to avoid or reduce the magnitude of the impact from the
associated Project activity), and then to address the resultant effect to the
resource/receptor via abatement or compensatory measures or offsets (i.e., to
reduce the significance of the effect once all reasonably practicable mitigations
have been applied to reduce the impact magnitude).
Management and Monitoring
The final stage in the IA Process was the definition of the basic management
and monitoring measures that are needed to identify whether: a) impacts or
their associated Project components remain in conformance with applicable
standards/ guidelines; and b) mitigation measures are effectively addressing
impacts and compensatory measures and offsets are reducing effects to the
extent predicted. This is covered in Chapter 9 under environmental and social
management plan (ESMP)
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
159
7.4 KEY POTENTIAL IMPACTS
Based on the Potential Interactions Matrix for Project activities and likely
impacted resources/ receptors for construction phase of the proposed project
as shown in Table 4.1 following areas of impacts have been identified: The
identified interactions that are likely to result in significant impacts has been
shown in Table 4.2 has been discussed in detail in this chapter and the scoped
out interactions as shown in Table 4.3 has been left out with the justifications
provided there in or discussed very briefly.
7.4.1 Key Environmental Impacts
Change in Land use
Impacts on Land and Soil Environment;
Impact on Water resources and quality;
Ambient Air Quality;
Ambient Noise Level;
7.4.2 Key Ecological Impacts
Impact on habitat of herpetofaunal species, resident avifaunal species and
mammals;
Construction activity leading to habitat disturbance for Indian Gazelle;
Laying of approach roads leading to road kills of Herpetofauna
Mortality of Avifaunal and bat species due to collision risk
7.4.3 Key Social Impacts
Occupational health and safety of workers;
Community health and safety impacts; and
Potential impact on labour working conditions;
7.5 KEY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Construction Phase
7.5.1 Change in land use
For the purpose of assessment of impacts on land use of the area, the
following Project activities leading to alteration in land use of the area during
the Project life cycle were considered:
Construction of temporary structures such as construction site office,
functioning of the store yard, batching plant;
Construction/ upgradation of access roads;
Vehicular movement for transportation of WTG components and
construction materials;
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
160
Movement of construction equipment like cranes, excavators, dumpers,
trucks; and
Excavation and foundation casting operations prior to installation of
WTGs in the Project Area.
Criteria
For the assessment of land use, the sensitivity and magnitude criteria outlined
in Table 7.4 and Table 7.5 have been used respectively.
Table 7.4 Sensitivity Assessment Criteria for Land Use
Land Use Sensitivity Criteria
Low The Project footprint is present in wasteland with no human
settlement
Medium The Project is present in agricultural land or combination of agricultural
land and wasteland or residential land.
High The Project is present in any forest land, or national park or of national Importance covered by international and/or national designation.
Table 7.5 Criteria for Impact Magnitude for Assessment of Impact to Land Use
Magnitude Criteria
Negligible An imperceptible, barely or rarely perceptible change in landuse
characteristics. The change may be short term.
Small A subtle change in landuse character over a wide area of a more
noticeable change either over a restricted area or infrequently perceived.
The change may be short term.
Medium A noticeable change in landuse character, frequently perceived or
continuous and over a wide area; or a clearly evident change over a
restricted area that may be infrequently perceived. The change may be
medium to long term and may not be reversible.
Large A clearly evident, frequently perceived and continuous change in landuse
characteristics affecting an extensive area. The change may be
long term and would not be reversible.
Context
Currently, the entire Project area is primarily used for agricultural purposes.
The agriculture in supplemented by a combination of borewells, irrigation
with the help of the PABR Dam as well as rainfall during the monsoon months
and there is only one cropping season in the year.
The project would result in change of the land use where the WTGs,
substation and internal roads are proposed. Approximately, 3.05 hectares of
land will be required per WTG and further land would be required for
internal access and installation of transmission towers. Additional land will be
required for labor camp, storage yards, batching plants, site office that would
temporarily alter the land use.The project activities which may alter the land
use of the area during the project life cycle for over a period of time are given
below:
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
161
Table 7.6 Periodic alteration of land use
SN. Activity Duration
1 Siting of site office, labor camp, batching plant, storage
yard
Temporary (4-6 months)
2 Access road construction/strengthening and its
consequent usage
Permanent
4 WTG installation, PSS, transmission towers with
transmission lines
Permanent (dependant on the
life cycle of the Project)
The land use change will be primarily for the batching plant, site office and
labour camps. The pooling sub station complex is built near the village of
Beluguppa and the land around the pooling sub station currently is used for
agricultural activity for grazing. Facilities such as the site access roads,
transmission lines and permanent structures such as WTGs, site office and the
pooling substation will remain until the end of the Project life cycle and are
likely to contribute to land use change.
Embedded/ in-built control
The impacts during the construction activity will be short term and the
construction of the Project will be executed in a phased manner
(approximately 4-6 months). Additionally, the EPC contractors will be
instructed to avoid any unnecessary disturbance to nearby surrounding
features or land parcels. Further, construction activities ad land disturbance
will be restricted to the footprint of the Project components and remaining
area to be kept undisturbed to the extent possible. After completion of the
construction work, areas utilised for labour camp and batching plant will be
restored to their original form.
Significance of Impacts
Taking into perspective the 48 WTGs for the project along with the internal
roads, laydown areas, batching plant and labour camp the impact significance
is envisaged to be moderate.
Additional Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures will be implemented to minimize potential
impacts on land use:
Construction activities should be restricted to designated area.
Waste should not be allowed to litter in and around the project area
On completion of construction activities, land used for temporary facilities
will be restored to the extent possible.
The land use in and around the permanent project facilities will not be
disturbed.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
162
Significance of Residual Impacts
The evaluation of significance is done for the activities that can have an impact
on land use that can be identified at planning stage and consequently
adequate mitigation measures can be adopted. The impact on land use is
majorly envisaged during construction stage. The residual impact is envisaged
to be minor, post implementation of mitigation measures.
Table 7.7 Impact on land use as a result of the Project
Impact Change in land use
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to Project site (specifically WTG locations, internal roads, laydown
areas, batching plant and labour camp)
Frequency Not applicable
Likelihood Likely
Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/
Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is envisaged to be moderate.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/
Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is envisaged to be minor.
Impacts on Land and Soil Environment
For the impact assessment, following phases of the project cycle were considered for potential impacts on soil and land capability. The phase wise project activities are listed below that may result in land and soil impacts:
Construction phase:
Establishment of access roads;
Selective clearing of vegetation in areas designated for WTG erection and other surface infrastructure;
Stripping and stockpiling of soil layers;
Digging for WTG foundations and electrical poles;
Storage of materials as well as transport of construction material; and
General building/construction activities.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
163
Operational phase:
Monitoring of WTG operations;
Routine maintenance activities at WTG locations;
Storage of oil and lubricants onsite. Decommissioning:
Removal of WTGs;
Removal of infrastructure from soil surfaces; and
Increased traffic on roads to transport dismantled WTG components and waste materials.
Soil Quality Criteria
For the assessment of soil quality, the sensitivity and magnitude criteria
outlined in Table 7.8 and Table 7.9 respectively have been used.
Table 7.8: Sensitivity Assessment Criteria for Soil quality (compaction, erosion and
contamination)
Sensitivity
Criteria
Contributing Criteria
Environment Social
Soil Quality
related criteria
as compaction,
erosion and
contamination
The extent to which the soil and
quality plays an ecosystem role in
terms of supporting biodiversity.
This includes its role as in supporting
a lifecycle stage
The extent to which the soil a quality
provides a use (agricultural use,
fishing) to the local communities and
businesses, or is important in terms of
national resource protection
objectives, targets and legislation
Low The soil quality does not support
diverse habitat or populations
and/or supports habitat or
population of low quality.
The soil quality has little or no role
in provisioning of services as
agricultural uses for the local
community.
Medium The soil quality supports diverse
habitat or population of flora and
fauna and supports habitats
commonly available in the Project
AoI.
The soil has local importance in
terms of provisioning services as
agricultural services but there is
ample capacity and / or adequate
opportunity for alternative sources
of comparable quality ie ready
availability across the AoI.
High The soil quality supports
economically important or
biologically unique species or
provides essential habitat for such
species.
The soil is wholly relied upon
locally, with no suitable technically
or economically feasible
alternatives, or is important at a
regional level for provisioning
services.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
164
Table 7.9 Criteria for Impact Magnitude for Assessment of Impact to Soil
Magnitude
Criteria
Negligible Small medium Large
Soil compaction,
erosion and
contamination
Qualitative-No
perceptible or
readily
measurable
change from
baseline
conditions
Scale-Localized
area as
Particular
activity areas
Time-Short
duration (few
days) or one
time as
temporary
Perceptible change
from baseline
conditions but
likely to easily
revert back to
earlier stage with
mitigation
Scale- -Project site,
activity areas and
immediate vicinity
not impacting any
sensitive receptor
Short term-Only
during particular
activities or phase
of the project
lifecycle as civil
works or
construction phase
(few months)
Clearly evident
(e.g. perceptible
and readily
measurable)
change from
baseline conditions
and/or likely take
time to revert back
to earlier stage
with mitigation
Scale- Project site,
activity areas and
immediate vicinity
impacting
sensitive
receptor/s
Long term-Spread
across several
phases of the
project lifecycle
(few years)
Major (e.g. order
of magnitude)
change in
comparison to
baseline
conditions
and/or likely
difficult or may
not to revert back
to earlier stage
with mitigation
Scale- Regional or
international;
Permanent
change
Table 7.10 Impacts on land and soil environment during the project life cycle
SN. Impact
Project stage at which the impact may occur
Construction Operation and
maintenance
Decommissioning
1 Soil Erosion Yes No No
2 Soil Compaction Yes No Yes
3 Impact on Land due
Improper waste disposal Yes Yes Yes
4 Soil contamination due to
Leaks/spills Yes Yes No
The impacts which are likely to occur during different stages of the project and create effects on the land and soil environment of the project area (coloured green) are mentioned next.
Construction Phase
Soil Erosion impacts during the Construction Phase
Context
During the construction phase, top soil will be susceptible to erosion to some
extent due to site clearance activities. The scale of site clearance activities
would be small at WTG footprints at different parcel of lands, whereas in
areas of new internal road construction, excavated loose soil would be
susceptible to erosion. The removal of stabilized top soil would result in slope
destabilization and increased soil erosion.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
165
As the project is located in dry sandy land and during the visit the surface
water bodies were observed to be dry, which, reportedly is the case during
most of the year due to scanty rainfall, indirect impacts of soil erosion on
waterways are not expected; though it would contribute to the higher levels of
particulate matter in ambient air quality.
Embedded/in-built control
Using existing roads to access the site to the extent possible;
Construction materials and wastes will be stored in designated areas. Stripping of topsoil shall not be conducted earlier than required; (vegetation cover will be maintained for as long as possible) in order to prevent the erosion (wind and water) of soil;
Topography shall be restored to the extent possible and re-vegetated to prevent soil erosion to the extent possible;
Significance of Impact
Based on the above the impact after incorporating the embedded control the
impact significance is considered to be minor.
Additional Mitigation Measures
As the embedded controls are sufficient to address the effects of the impact, no
mitigation measures are deemed essential.
Significance of Residual Impacts
The significance of residual impacts will be negligible.
Table 7.11 Soil Erosion impacts during construction phase
Impact Soil Erosion impacts during construction phase
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to Project area (specifically construction areas)
Frequency Construction Phase
Likelihood Likely
Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/
Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered as minor.
Significance of Residual Impacts
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
166
Impact Soil Erosion impacts during construction phase
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/
Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered as negligible.
Soil Compaction concerns during the construction phase
Context
The project will undertake the soil compaction activity to ensure soil stability
during the establishment of storage areas for WTG components, access road,
installation of batching plant, establishment of substation, CMS building etc.
During construction activities, there would be compaction of soil in the project
area during movement of vehicles/ construction machinery and work force
movement. In addition, laying of electrical lines in the agricultural field
during installation of internal and external transmission lines will also lead to
the compaction of agricultural soil to certain extent.
The soil compaction would lead to impact the soil physical properties such as
reduction in pore spaces, water infiltration rate and soil strength etc. However
it should be noted that soil in this area (only in flat area) is primarily used for
agriculture.
Embedded/in-built control
The routes for movement of heavy machinery shall be designated to avoid the
soil compaction in other areas;
Significance of Impacts
Based on the above the impact after incorporating the embedded control the
impact significance is considered to be minor.
Additional Mitigation Measures
As the embedded controls are sufficient to address the effects of the impact, no
mitigation measures are deemed essential.
Significance of Residual Impacts
The significance of impact is envisaged to be negligible.
Table 7.12 Soil Compaction impacts during construction phase
Impact Soil Compaction impacts during construction phase
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
167
Impact Soil Compaction impacts during construction phase
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to Project footprint area
Frequency Construction Phase
Likelihood Likely
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/
Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered minor.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/
Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered negligible.
Impacts on land due to improper waste disposal
Context
General construction waste generated onsite will comprise of surplus or off-
specification materials such as concrete, wooden pallets, steel cuttings/filings,
packaging paper or plastic, wood, metals etc. Municipal domestic wastes
consisting of food waste, plastic, glass, aluminium cans and waste paper will
also be generated by the construction workforce at any canteen facility/ rest
area which shall be constructed for them. A small proportion of the waste
generated during construction phase will be hazardous and may include used
oil, hydraulic fluids, waste fuel, grease and waste oil containing rags. If
improperly managed, solid waste could create impacts on land.
Embedded/in-built control
The construction contractors will have control over the amount and types
of waste (hazardous and non- hazardous) produced at the site. Workers
will be strictly instructed about random disposal of any waste generated
from the construction activity;
Construction contractor should ensure that no unauthorized dumping of
used oil and other hazardous wastes is undertaken from the site;
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
168
Significance of Impacts
Based on the above the impact after incorporating the embedded control the
impact significance is considered to be minor.
Additional Mitigation Measures
Municipal domestic waste generated at site to be segregated onsite;
Ensure hazardous waste containers are properly labelled and stored onsite
provided with impervious surface, shed and secondary containment
system;
Ensure routinely disposal of hazardous waste through approved vendors
and records are properly documented; and
Disposal of hazardous wastes will be done strictly as per the conditions of
authorisation granted by Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board.
Construction contractor should ensure daily collection and periodic
(weekly) disposal of construction waste generated debris, concrete, metal
cuttings wastes, waste/used oil etc.;
Ensure hazardous waste is properly labelled, stored onsite at a location
provided with impervious surface, shed and secondary containment
system as per in accordance to Hazardous Wastes Rules, 2016.
The municipal waste from the labour camp will only be routed through
proper collection and handover to local municipal body for further
disposal. The hazardous wastes will be temporarily stored in labelled
drums on impervious surface at designated area onsite and will be
disposed of through approved vendors in accordance to Hazardous
Wastes Rules, 2008. The nearest Common Hazardous Waste transfer
Station and Disposal Facility (CHWTSDF) is yet to be identified for the
Project.
Significance of Residual Impacts
The significance of impact will be reduced to negligible on implementation of
mitigation measures.
Table 7.13 Impact on land due to improper waste disposal during construction phase
Impact Impacts on land due to improper waste disposal
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to Project activity area and immediate surroundings (up to 100m)
Frequency Construction Phase
Likelihood Likely
Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
169
Impact Impacts on land due to improper waste disposal
Resource/
Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered minor.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/
Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered negligible.
Soil Contamination impacts due to Leaks/Spills
Context
Soil contamination during the construction phase may result from leaks and
spills of oil, lubricants, or fuel from heavy equipment, improper handling of
chemical/fuel storage and wastewater. Such spills could have a long-term
impact on soil quality, but are expected to be localised in nature.
Embedded/in-built control
Spill control measures such as the storage and handling of chemicals and fuel
in concrete areas with secondary containment will be implemented to
minimize impacts in the event of a spill.
Significance of Impact
Based on the above the impact after incorporating the embedded control the
impact significance is considered to be minor.
Additional Mitigation Measures
Use of spill control kits to contain and clean small spills and leaks.
The sewage generated onsite will be treated and disposed through septic
tanks and soak pits as per specifications given in IS 2470: 1995 (Part I and
II).
Transport vehicles and equipment should undergo regular maintenance to
avoid any oil leakages; and
Any unloading and loading protocols should be prepared for diesel, oil
and used oil respectively and workers trained to prevent/contain spills
and leaks.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
170
Significance of Residual Impacts
The significance of impact will be reduced to negligible on implementation of
mitigation measures.
Table 7.14 Soil contamination due to Leaks/spills during construction phase
Impact Soil contamination due to Leaks/spills during construction phase
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact
Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to project activity area
Frequency Construction phase
Likelihood Unlikely
Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/
Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered minor.
Residual Impact Significance
Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/
Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered negligible.
Operation and maintenance phase
Impacts on land due to improper waste disposal during the Operation and
Maintenance Phase
The operational phase of the project will have limited impacts on soil in form
of waste generation and soil contamination due to accidental spillages/
leakages.
Context
During the operation and maintenance phase, wastes that are envisaged to be
generated will primarily fall into two categories i.e. (a) domestic solid and
liquid waste and (b) hazardous wastes and will be generated at the Pooling
Sub Station as well as the SCADA/ CMS building located near the villagte of
Beluguppa. Waste is likely to be generated at the 48 WTGs that fall in the
scope of this project. These facilities will be manned by personnel on a day-
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
171
night rota. Based on discussions with the OUWPPL and Suzlon personnel, it
was understood that waste was segregated and stored at the storage yard in
Gangavaram for eventual disposal by the approved vendor. Ideally, operation
and maintenance activities in a wind farm project would generate hazardous
wastes over a temporal scale, albeit to a lesser concentration that those that
would be generated during the construction phase.
Embedded/in-built control
As the operation and maintenance phase is envisaged to occur throughout the
life cycle of the Project (envisaged, in this case, to be approximately 20-25
years) the waste generated will have to be disposed of through approved
vendors in accordance with Hazardous Waste Rules, 2016 and its subsequent
amendments, thereon. The hazardous wastes will be stored onsite at separate
designated covered area provided with impervious flooring and sent for
disposal to nearest CHWTSDF that has been designated for Suzlon projects in
the area. During operation phase, the quantity of municipal waste and
hazardous waste generated is envisaged to be less and with hazardous waste
generation limited, primarily, to operation and maintenance activities of the
WTGs. The waste generated would be routed through proper collection and
containment before processing and disposal to the approved CHWTSDF, with
the help of the vendor that has been approved by the APPCB.
Significance of Impact
Based on the above the impact after incorporating the embedded control
the impact significance is envisaged to be negligible.
Additional Mitigation measures
As the embedded controls are sufficient to address the impact no mitigation
measures are deemed necessary.
Significance of Residual Impacts
The significance of residual impacts is envisaged to be negligible.
Table 7.15 Impact on land due to improper waste disposal during the Operation and
Maintenance Phase
Impact Impact on land due to improper waste disposal during the Operation and
Maintenance Phase
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to PSS, SCADA, 48 WTG locations during maintenance activities
Frequency Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Project
Likelihood Likely
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
172
Impact Impact on land due to improper waste disposal during the Operation and
Maintenance Phase
Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/
Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is envisaged to be negligible.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/
Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is envisaged to be negligible.
Soil Contamination due to Leaks/Spills during the Operation and
Maintenance Phase
Context
There are chances of spillage of oil during maintenance work at the 48 WTG
locations and would be attributed to (but not limited to) lubricating oils from
gearbox systems, hydraulic systems of the turbine etc. The accidental
spillages at oil/lubricants and hazardous waste storage areas may cause
contamination of soil and ground water. There is a likelihood of spillage to
occur at an area that is designated (during the life cycle of the project) for
storage WTG spares, components and maintenance material that would
comprise of oils for the above mentioned activities, especially during handling
and decanting operations.
Embedded/in-built control
Ensure oil/ lubricants are stored on impervious floor in the storage area
having secondary containment;
Use of spill control kits to contain and clean small spills and leaks during
O&M activities; and
The guidelines and procedures shall be prepared and followed for
immediate clean-up actions following any spillages.
The probability of the impact is only during WTG maintenance and therefore
occasional. In case of accidental spillage, the impacts will be confined to the
WTG land parcels and storage area (if proposed and utilised during the O/M
phase of the Project).
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
173
Significance of Impact
Based on the above the impact after incorporating the embedded control
the impact significance is envisaged to be negligible.
Additional Mitigation measures
As the embedded controls are sufficient to address the impacts additional
mitigations measures are not deemed necessary.
Residual Impact significance
The significance of impact is envisaged to be negligible.
Table 7.16 Leaks/Spills during operation phase
Impact Leaks and spills during the operation phase
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale
Limited to 48 WTG locations and pooling substation and areas earmarked
for storage yard for WTG spares, components and maintenance material
that would comprise of oils etc.
Frequency Cannot be precisely determined but during the entire life cycle of the project
Likelihood Unlikely
Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/
Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is envisaged to be negligible.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/
Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is envisaged to be negligible.
Decommissioning Phase
Impact to Soil and Land environment during decommissioning phase
The decommissioning activities will cause following impacts on soil:
Soil compaction due to the increased vehicular and workforce movement,
dismantling and storage of WTG components on the adjacent land,
removal of internal electric lines/ poles etc.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
174
Waste will be generated in form of dismantled WTG components and
demolition debris from WTG foundations, storage yard and substation
complex. Electric components such as transformers, insulators, wires will
be generated. The waste will be mainly of inert nature;
The possibility of soil contamination during decommissioning phase is
very less though may occur due to leakage from machinery and
transportation vehicles and during collection of remaining oil/ lubricants
in the WTGs.
Embedded/in-built control
The decommissioning of the wind farm will be carried out in a planned
manner.
During decommissioning phase, the quantity of waste generated will be
high. The waste will be routed through proper collection, storage and
disposal. The waste will be evaluated for its recycling/ reuse/ scrap value
and disposed off accordingly.
Impact Significance
The overall significance of impacts on soil environment due to
decommissioning activities is assessed as minor.
Additional Mitigation Measures
Following mitigation measures are proposed to reduce the impacts of wind
farm decommissioning activities on soil environment:
The vehicular movement during decommissioning activities should be
restricted to the designated route path;
The demolition/ dismantling waste should not be left over in whole
project area and to be collected and stored at designated area only for
further segregation and disposal.
Significance of Residual Impacts
The significance of impact will vary from minor to negligible on
implementation of mitigation measures.
Table 7.17 Impact to Soil and Land environment during decommissioning phase
activities
Impact Impact on soil and land environment from decommissioning phase
activities
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
175
Impact Scale Limited to Project area
Frequency Decommissioning phase of the Project
Likelihood Likely
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/Receptor
Sensitivity Low Medium High
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is envisaged to be minor.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/Receptor
Sensitivity Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is envisaged to be minor to negligible.
7.5.2 Impact on Water Resources
The impacts of proposed project on water environment are assessed with
respect to following:
Decreased water availability form the water resources of the area due to
consumption of water for carrying out project activities; and
Decreased water quality due to wastewater release and spills/leaks from
project activities.
Criteria
For the assessment of water quality, the sensitivity and magnitude criteria
outlined in Table 7.18 and Table 7.19 respectively have been used.
Table 7.18 Sensitivity Assessment Criteria for Water Resources (Surface water and
Ground water)
Sensitivity Criteria Contributing Criteria
Environment Social
Water Resources -
Surface water and
ground water
(quality/quantity
related criteria)
The extent to which the
water resource plays an
ecosystem or amenity role
in terms of supporting
biodiversity either directly
or indirectly, particularly
with respect to dependent
ecosystems.
The extent to which the water resource
provides or could provide a use (drinking
water, agricultural uses, washing and other
domestic or industrial, use as waterways) to
the local communities and businesses, or is
important in terms of national resource
protection objectives, targets and legislation.
Low The water resource does
not support diverse
aquatic habitat or
populations, or supports
aquatic habitat or
population that is of low
quality.
The water resource has little or no role in terms of provisioning services as agricultural water source, other domestic uses as washing, bathing, industrial use and waterways for the local community.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
176
Sensitivity Criteria Contributing Criteria
The groundwater resource is not currently
abstracted and used in the vicinity of the
Project, but is of sufficient quality and yield
to be used for that purpose in the future (and
there is a reasonable potential for future use).
Medium The water resource
supports diverse
populations of flora and /
or fauna but available in
the surface water bodies in
the region.
The surface water resources have local
importance in terms of provisioning services
but there is ample capacity and / or
adequate opportunity for alternative sources
of comparable quality.
The groundwater resource is an important water supply, and is currently used, but there is capacity and / or adequate opportunity for alternative sources of comparable quality.
High The water resource supports economically important or biologically unique aquatic species or provides essential habitat for such species
The surface water resources are wholly relied upon locally, with no suitable technically or economically feasible alternatives, or is important at a regional or transboundary watershed level for provisioning services
The groundwater resource is wholly relied upon locally, with no suitable technically or economically feasible alternatives, or is important at a regional or national level for water supply or contribution to groundwater dependent ecosystems (e.g. transboundary rivers).
Table 7.19 Criteria for Impact Magnitude for Assessment of Impact to Surface and
Ground water Resources
Magnitude
Criteria
Negligible Small Medium Large
General
Criteria
No perceptible or
readily measurable
change from
baseline conditions.
Perceptible
change from
baseline
conditions but
likely to be within
applicable norms
and standards for
mode of use.
Clearly evident (e.g.
perceptible and
readily measurable)
change from baseline
conditions and / or
likely to approach and
even occasionally
exceed applicable
norms and standards
for mode of use.
Major changes in
comparison to
baseline
conditions and /
or likely to
regularly or
continually
exceed applicable
norms and
standards for
mode of use.
Water
Quantity
There is likely to be
negligible (less than
1% of lean season
flow) or no
consumption of
surface water by
the Project at any
time
The Project will
consume surface
water, but the
amounts
abstracted are
likely to be
relatively small in
comparison to the
resource available
at the time of use
The Project will
consume surface
water, and the
amounts abstracted
are likely to be
significant in
comparison to the
resource available at
the time of use (i.e.
taking into account
The Project will
consume surface
water, and the
amounts
abstracted are
likely to be very
significant in
comparison to the
resource available
at the time of use
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
177
Magnitude
Criteria
Negligible Small Medium Large
(i.e. taking into
account seasonal
fluctuation)
seasonal fluctuation) (i.e. taking into
account seasonal
fluctuation)
There is likely to be negligible or no abstraction, use of or discharge to the groundwater by the Project at any time.
The Project will consume groundwater or deliver discharge to groundwater, but the amounts abstracted / discharged are likely to be relatively small in comparison to the resource available at the time of use (i.e. taking into account seasonal fluctuation).
The Project will consume groundwater or discharge to groundwater, and the amounts abstracted / discharged are likely to be significant in comparison to the resource available at the time of use (i.e. taking into account seasonal fluctuation).
The Project will consume groundwater or discharge to groundwater, and the amounts abstracted / discharged are likely to be very significant in comparison to the resource available at the time of use (i.e. taking into account seasonal fluctuation).
Water
Quality
Discharges are
expected to be well
within statutory
limits
Discharges are
expected to be
within statutory
limits
Occasional breach(es)
of statutory discharge
limits (limited
periods) expected
Repeated
breaches of
statutory
discharge limits
(over extended
periods) expected
Abstractions from
or discharge to
aquifer(s) are
unlikely to cause
water quality
issues.
Groundwater
quality be within
ambient levels or
allowable criteria
or may exceed for
1-2 parameters
which is common
occurrence due to
geological regime
of the area.
Abstraction or
discharge to
aquifer(s) may
cause small but
local changes in
water quality in
the aquifer
system. These can
be considered
potential short-
term localized
effects on
groundwater
quality which is
likely to return to
equilibrium
conditions within
a short (months)
timeframe.
Groundwater quality
exceeds ambient
levels or allowable
criteria for key
parameters.
Abstraction or
discharge to aquifer(s)
are expected to cause
potential localized
effects on
groundwater quality
which are likely to be
fairly long lasting and
/ or give rise to
indirect ecological
and / or socio-
economic impacts.
Groundwater
quality exceeds
ambient levels or
allowable criteria.
Abstractions or
discharge to
aquifer(s) are
expected to cause
potentially severe
effects on
groundwater
quality which are
likely to be long-
lasting (e.g. years
or permanent)
and / or give rise
to indirect
ecological and /
or socio-economic
impacts.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
178
Construction Phase
Impact on water availability
Context
As stated in Chapter 2, Water will be required for civil works during the
construction of the foundation for all WTGs estimating 70 m3 of water for each
WTG foundation activities, whicg totals to approximately 3360 m3 of water.
Embedded/in-built control
Water tankers should be utilised to fulfil supply required for all purposes,
including construction work, use in labour camp and site office and local
surface water bodies should not be utilised for these purposes.
Impact Significance
The sensitivity of water resource in the area is considered as medium due to
the fact that the project area is generally a dry area with little rainfall. Water is
supplemented for agriculture and domestic purposes by a combination of a
canal system originating from the PABR Dam . As per the CGWB brochure for
Anantapur, the mandal of Beluguppa is categorized as Over Exploited categor
of CGWB (1) . However, the direct negative impact on water resources due to
construction activities will be short term and limited mainly to construction
phase of the project. Based on the above the impact is assessed to be minor.
Additional Mitigation Measures
Following mitigation measures are proposed for conservation of water
resources of the area:
Construction labour deputed onsite to be sensitised about water
conservation and encouraged for optimal use of water;
Regular inspection for identification of water leakages and preventing
wastage of water from water supply tankers.
Blending of low quality water with fresh water for construction uses.
Recycling/reusing to the extent possible.
(1) Ground water brochure, Anantapur District, Andhra Pradesh. Central Ground Water Board. Southern region,
Hyderabad, September 2013. http://cgwb.gov.in/District_Profile/AP/Ananthapur.pdf. Accessed on 15/07/2016.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
179
Table 7.20 Impact on Water Resources during the Construction Phase
Impact Water Resources Availability
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to Project area
Frequency Construction phase
Likelihood Possible
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity
Low Medium High
The area around the Project Area has been classified as Over Exploited
by CGWB.
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered minor.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered minor.
Significance of Residual Impacts
After implementation of mitigation measures, the impact significance will be
minor.
Impact on water Quality
Context
There is a potential for contamination of surface and groundwater resources
resulting from improper management of sewage (~ 10 m3/day) at project site
office or other accidental spills/leaks at the storage areas.
Embedded/in-built control
The provisions of septic tank and soak pits will be provided (as per
specifications given in IS 2470 1995 Part I and Part II) onsite for treatment
and disposal of sewage, thereby minimizing the impacts of wastewater
discharge. Planning of toilets, soak pits and septic tanks, waste collection
areas should be away from natural drainage channels;
Ensure proper cover and stacking of loose construction material at
Batching plant site and WTG’s site to prevent surface runoff and
contamination of receiving water body;
Use of licensed contractors for management and disposal of waste and
sludge;
Labourers will be given training towards proactive use of designated
areas/bins for waste disposal and encouraged for use of toilets. Open
defecation and random disposal of sewage will be strictly restricted;
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
180
Spill/ leakage clearance plan to be adopted for immediate cleaning of
spills and leakages.
Impact Significance
Based on the above the impact is assessed to be negligible.
Additional Mitigation Measures
As the impact is sufficiently addressed by the embedded controls the
requirement of additional mitigation measures is not foreseen for this impact.
Residual Impact Significance
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual significance of impacts during construction phase will be negligible.
Table 7.21 Impact on water quality
Impact Water Resources and Quality
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Mainly limited to PSS, CMS, SCADA and Site Office
Frequency Construction Phase
Likelihood Likely
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity Low Medium High
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered negligible.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered negligible.
Operation and maintenance phase
Impact on water availability during the Operation and Maintenance Phase
Context
During the operation phase of this project, an estimate of 2-3 m3/day of water
would be required during operation phase to meet domestic requirements of
O&M staff and for use in the SCADA building and adjoining pooling sub-
station complex, located near the village of Beluguppa.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
181
Embedded/in-built control
Domestic water demand will be met with the help of tankers and bottled
potable water purchased from authorised distributors located in the
nearby villages and from the nearby city of Anantapur ;
Optimising water usage in the SCADA building and substation area by
application of water conservation measures such as sensor based taps, low
flush urinals etc.
Impact Significance
The overall significance of impacts on water availability due to operational
activities is envisaged to be negligible.
Additional Mitigation measures
As the impact is sufficiently addressed by the embedded controls additional
mitigation measures are not foreseen for this impact.
Residual Impact Significance
The significance of the residual impact is envisaged to be negligible.
Table 7.22 Impact on water availability during operation phase
Impact Impact on water availability during the Operation and Maintenance
Phase
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to Pooling Sub Station, SCADA room near the village of
Beluguppa.
Frequency Operation phase
Likelihood Likely
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity Low Medium High
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is envisaged to be negligible.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is envisaged to be negligible.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
182
Impact on water quality during the Operation and Maintenance Phase
Context
During operation phase, wastewater generation is expected to be nil from the
power generation process. Only sewage would be generated from pooling
substation and SCADA building, which is located near the village of
Beluguppa and this, will also be of negligible quantity. The estimated sewage
generation from project site is expected to be approximately 2 m3/day.
Embedded/in-built control
The drainage and sewerage system will be provided for the collection and
treatment of waste water at the SCADA building/ CMS and substation
areas; and
No wastewater discharge on open land will be practiced.
Impact Significance
The overall significance of impacts on water quality due to operational
activities is envisaged to be negligible.
Additional Mitigation Measures
As the impact is sufficiently addressed by the embedded controls the
requirement of additional mitigation measures is not foreseen for this impact.
Residual Impact Significance
The significance of the residual impacts is envisaged to be negligible.
Table 7.23 Impact on water quality during operation phase
Impact Impact on water quality during operation phase
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to Pooling Sub Station, SCADA room located near the village of
Beluguppa.
Frequency Operation phase
Likelihood Likely
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity Low Medium High
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is envisaged to be negligible.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is envisaged to be negligible.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
183
Decommissioning Phase
No impacts are observed to water resources are envisaged during the
decommissioning phase of the project.
7.5.3 Impact on Air Quality
The impact assessment with respect to air quality of the study area has been
undertaken for the project activities described below:
Construction activities including site preparation, construction of WTG
foundation, erection of internal and external transmission line,
construction of office building;
Transportation of WTG components, construction material, construction
machinery and personnel;
Operation of batching plant;
Operation of DG sets for emergency power backup;
Operation and maintenance activities during operation phase; and
Decommissioning activities.
Criteria
For the assessment of air quality, the sensitivity and magnitude criteria
outlined in Table 7.24 and Table 7.25 respectively have been used. The air
quality impacts associated with the construction activities have been assessed
qualitatively, using professional judgement and based on past experience
from similar projects.
Table 7.24 Sensitivity Criteria for Air quality
Sensitivity
Criteria
Contributing Criteria
Human Receptors Ecological Receptors
Low Locations where human
exposure is transient.1
Locally designated sites; and/or
areas of specific ecological interest, not subject
to statutory protection (for example, as defined
by the project ecology team).
Medium Few Receptors( settlements)
within 500 m of project
activity area as roads,
batching plant, WTG s etc.
Nationally designated sites.
High Densely populated receptors
(settlements) within 500 m of
project activity area as roads,
batching plant, WTG s etc.
Internationally designated sites.
1 As per the NAAQS and World Bank/IFC guidelines, there are no standards that apply to short –term exposure, eg one or
two hours, but there is still a risk of health impacts, albeit less certain.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
184
Table 7.25 Criteria for Impact Magnitude for Assessment of Impact to Air Quality
(Construction Phase)
Magnitude
Criteria
Negligible Small Medium Large
Air Quality Soil type with
large grain size
(eg sand);
and/or No
emissions/dust
generation due
to Project across
all phases
Soil type with
large grain
size (eg sand);
and/or
Limited
emissions/du
st generations
for short
duration
Moderately
dusty soil
type (eg silt);
and/or
Dust
generation
and emissions
from Projects
for long
duration
Potentially dusty
soil type (eg clay,
which will be
prone to
suspension when
dry due to small
particle size); and
Significant
process emissions
from Project for
the entire Project
cycle.
Construction Phase
Air quality will largely get impacted from the following sources during the
construction phase:
Fugitive dust emissions from site clearing, excavation work, cutting and
levelling work at WTG sites and access/ internal roads, stacking of soils,
handling of construction material, transportation of material, emission due
to movement of vehicles and heavy construction machinery etc.;
Vehicular emissions due to traffic movement on site and on access roads;
Particulate emissions from operation of batching plant;
Exhaust emissions from construction machineries, other heavy equipment
like bull dozers, excavators, and compactors;
Emissions from emergency power diesel generator required during
construction activity.
Further the WTGs are spread across a larger area and the air quality impacts
would largely be limited to 500 m of the construction activity area, batching
plant and material storage area and will not have any long term impact on the
ambient air quality of the area.
Receptors
Receptors have been observed to exist within the 500 m radius of the WTGs
and have been elaborated upon in Chapter 2 of the report.
Embedded/in-built control
Preventive measures such as storage of construction material in sheds,
covering of construction materials during transportation will be
undertaken, for reducing dust as part of the embedded controls.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
185
Emissions from the emergency DG set and other stationary machines will
be controlled by ensuring that the engines are always properly tuned and
maintained.
Minimize stockpiling by coordinating excavations, spreading, re-grading
and compaction activities;
Speed of vehicles on site will be limited to 10-15 km/hr which will help in
minimizing fugitive dust emissions due to vehicular movement;
Cease or phase down work if excess fugitive dust is observed. Investigate
the source of dust and ensure proper suppression measures;
Proper maintenance of engines and use of vehicles with Pollution Under
Control (PUC) Certificate; and
Idling of vehicles and equipment will be prevented
Impact Significance
The impact on air quality will be local and short-term, restricted to the
construction period. The overall impacts are assessed to be minor.
Table 7.26 Impact on air quality during construction phase
Impact Ambient Air quality
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Project area and vicinity
Frequency Not Applicable
Likelihood Likely
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity Low Medium High
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered minor.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity Low Medium High
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered negligible.
Residual Impact Significance
The residual impact due to the Project on air quality will be negligible.
Operation Phase
Source of Impacts
As the Project is a renewable and clean energy development project, the
operation phase will be largely free from air emissions.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
186
Decommissioning Phase
The decommissioning activities will have limited impact on the air quality of
the area and will be mainly in form of dust emissions due demolition of office
building. The increased vehicular movement for transportation of dismantled
WTGs, demolition debris, scrap materials will also generate fugitive dust
emissions.
Significance of Impact
The impact on air quality during decommissioning phase of the Project is
assessed to be minor.
Additional Mitigation Measures
The embedded measures need to be implemented.
Residual Impact Significance
The residual impact due to the Project on air quality will be minor.
Table 7.27 Impact on air quality during decommissioning phase
Impact Impact on air quality during decommissioning phase
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Project footprint area and surrounding areas up to 100 m distance
Frequency Decommissioning phase
Likelihood Likely
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity Low Medium High
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered minor.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered minor.
7.5.4 Aesthetics and Landscape concerns
Visual attributes are assessed with reference to surrounding landscape
character and their distinctive features. In addition to these aesthetic impacts
also consider the setting up of WTGs in the area of study, clearance of
vegetation for access roads/ transmission lines, installation of ancillary
facilities as well as laying of transmission lines/towers etc.
Context
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
187
The project is located in the villages of Beluguppa, Srirangapuram,
Thagguparthi, Yeragudi, Avulenna, Y. Rengapuram, Duddekunta and
Narinjagundlapalli, Nakkalapalli andSreerangapuram in Beluguppa Mandal
of Anantpur District in the state of Andhra Pradesh. The land surrounding
the Project is utilised for agricultural purposes. The landscape character of the
surrounding area primarily comprises of flat terrain. The landscape character
also comprises of settlements (mentioned above) that are located in the Project
Area as well as a series of village roads, in addition to the State Highway 82
that is the main access route to the Project.
Receptors The visual impacts will be perceived by two types of receptors during the operational phases, namely:
Receptors located at a fix point, such as settlements in the study area; and
Receptors temporarily viewing the wind farm, such as passing motorists.
Construction Phase
The Project site is located on flat terrain that is present in the Project area.
Although the turbines will be manufactured off-site and the construction
phase will be relatively for a short duration (04-06 months), large equipment
or infrastructure such as cranes, dumpers, transportation vehicles will be
required on site during the installation of the WTGs. The significance of the
visual impacts will decrease with increasing distance from the Project site.
During construction phase, visual impact due to the presence of Project
infrastructure such as pooling substation, batching plant, labour camp,
construction material storage area, temporary site office in the Project site are
anticipated.
Impact Significance
The construction phase will be for approximately 04-06 months. The larger
structures such as batching plant and pooling substation would lead to loss in
visual aesthetics in the area albeit, in a localised area. The overall impact
significance has been assessed as minor.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures should be implemented to minimize
potential of visual impacts during construction phase:
The area of the site office and storage should be limited to the extent
necessary;
Vegetation should be cleared only in locations where WTGs, ancillary
facilities, pooling substation, transmission lines and access/internal roads
are planned to minimize the visual impact of deforestation;
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
188
Minimize presence of ancillary structure on site, avoid fencing and
minimize access road disturbances; and
After completion of construction works, areas utilized for batching plant,
labour camp and stock yard should be restored to original form.
Table 7.28 Landscape- aesthetic impacts during the Construction Phase
Impact Landscape- aesthetic impacts during the Construction Phase
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to Project area (specifically construction area)
Frequency During construction phase
Likelihood Likely
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/ Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
The Project activity area has settlements of 10 villages and does not
exhibit large/ prominent structures.
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered minor.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/ Receptor
Sensitivity Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered as negligible.
Significance of Residual Impacts
After implementation of mitigation measures, residual impacts will reduce to
negligible.
Operation and Maintenance Phase
As mentioned above, the land where the WTGs are located comprise of flat
terrain that is used for agriculture. During the site visit, in May, structures
were observed to be within 500 m of the WTGs that form the scope the
assessment. However the area within which the WTGs are located are also
utilised by Suzlon for other projects/ Clients and could pose a concern in the
cumulative sense. In addition to this, the presence of a structure of height of 90
m where prominent structures are absent would be a visual impact to nearby
villages and passing motorists. Additionally, the movement of the turbine
blades and shadow flicker that is generated could also pose a concern with
regard to shadow flickering effects.
Impact Significance
The most prominent source of visual impact during the operational phase is
the presence of the wind turbines and the assemblage of transmission lines
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
189
that evacuate to the Pooling Sub Stations and eventually to the grid. Assessing
the impacts is highly subjective, as it depends on the perception of the viewer.
People’s attitudes can differ and presence of the wind farm can be viewed as
both a positive and negative impact on the surrounding areas. In addition to
this, the perception of villagers of existing wind farms in the area remains to
be seen, during the operation phase of the Project.
In view of above, impact significance of visual impacts during the operational
phase of the Project has been envisaged to be minor, owing to the fact that
windfarms already exist in the area
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures should be implemented to minimize
potential of visual impacts during operational phase:
Signage related to the wind farm should be discrete and confined to
entrance gates;
No other corporate or advertising signage should be displayed on site;
The footprint of operations and maintenance facilities as well as parking
and vehicular circulation should be clearly defined and not be allowed to
spill over into other areas of the site.
Significance of Residual Impacts
After implementation of mitigation measures, residual impacts will reduce to
negligible.
Table 7.29 Landscape- aesthetic impacts during the Operation and Maintenance Phase
Impact Landscape- aesthetic impacts during the Operation and Maintenance
Phase
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Up to 5-6 km depending on terrain
Frequency Operation Phase
Likelihood Likely
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/ Receptor
Sensitivity Low Medium High
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is envisaged to be minor.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/ Receptor
Sensitivity Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is envisaged to be negligible.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
190
7.5.5 Occupational health and Safety of Workers
Construction Phase and Installation Phase
Context
As mentioned earlier in the report, installation work for 48 WTGs, the
transmission lines as well the PSS was underway during the ERM site visit
and was observed to be in various phases of installation. Hence, there would
be a need for labour to complete the remainder of the work for eventual
commissioning. According to the IFC EHS Guidelines, the occupational health
and safety risks during the construction, operations and decommissioning of
an onshore wind power project is generally similar to those of the large
industrial facilities and infrastructure projects. The main risks of occupational
health and safety include working at heights, working with rotating
machinery, and falling objects and the terrain of the present project makes the
workers highly susceptible to physical injuries.
Significance of Impact
Based on the above, the impact significance is assessed to be moderate.
Additional Mitigation Measures
The following risk mitigation measures are suggested to minimize the
risks/hazards related to health and safety onsite:
The workers (both regular and contractual) on the project should be
provided with trainings on the Health and Safety policy in place, and their
role in the same and refresher courses will be provided throughout the life
of the project
Establish a grievance redressal mechanism in place, to allow for the
employees and workers to report any concern or grievance related to work
activities
Put in place measures to reduce the risk of prevalence of diseases,
including screening of workers, undertaking health awareness amongst
the workers, implementation of vector control programs, avoiding
presence of unsanitary conditions and better facilities in the project site,
such as safe drinking water, proper waste collection and disposal etc.
Significance of Residual Impacts
The assessment of the residual impacts on occupational health and safety are
given envisaged to be minor after implementation of mitigation measures.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
191
Table 7.30 Impact Significance on Occupational Health and Safety: Construction phase
and installation phase
Impact Occupational Health and Safety : Construction and installation phases
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to Project Footprint area
Frequency Project life cycle
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible small Medium Large
Resource/Receptor
Sensitivity Low Medium High
Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered to be Moderate
Significance of Residual Impacts
Resource/Receptor
Sensitivity Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of Residual Impacts is considered Minor
Operation and Maintenance Phase
Source of Impact
The windfarm operation will involve electro-mechanical preventive and
restoration works. These maintenance works will involve climbing up the
WTG or electrical poles.
Possible Consequences
Following occupational health and safety hazards would be encountered in
operation phase:
Falling from height;
Working on live electrical wire and electrical safety;
Exposure to electric magnetic field.
Embedded Provisions
The sub-contractors carrying out the maintenance works have health and
safety policy and system in place.
Impact Significance
The significance of the health and safety impacts in operation phase after
implementation of these mitigation measures is assessed to be Negligible.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
192
Mitigation/Management Measures
Suzlon as the O& M contractor is recommended to set up following
monitoring system to ensure health and safety compliance of its own staff and
that of sub-contractors.
Develop a site-specific health and safety plan for Project and assign the
responsibility for its implementation at site;
Establish safe working methods and written procedures;
Obtain and check safety method statements from contractors before
allowing them to work on site;
Allow only authorized people on to site;
Display health and safety notification details at appropriate places; and
Monitor health and safety performance through an operating audit.
Significance of Residual Impacts
The assessment of the residual impacts on occupational health and safety are
given envisaged to be minor after implementation of mitigation measures.
Table 7.31 Impact Significance on Occupational Health and Safety: Operation and
Maintenance Phase
Impact Occupational health and safety: Operation and Maintenance Phase
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale
Operation and Maintenance work for 24 WTGs will be monitored
through a SCADA/ CMS that will be set up near the village of
Beluguppa
Frequency Periodically all through the operation phase during maintenance
and inspections.
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Vulnerability of Social
Receptors
Low Medium High
The operation and maintenance work will be done by Suzlon.
Hence, OUWPPLwill only have a supervising or monitoring
responsibility.
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered to be Minor
Significance of Residual Impacts
Resource/Receptor
Sensitivity Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Residual Impact
Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of Residual Impacts is considered Minor
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
193
Decomissioning Phase
Context
Occupational health and safety is a dynamic process with challenges being
faced on a daily basis. Based on the premise that accidents can occur at any
time, the personnel at OUWPPL and Suzlon should rigorously adopt practices
and disseminate experiences to the staff and labour that are involved in
various aspects of decommissioning during this phase and ensure that best
practices are followed at all time and that personnel are wearing PPE’s are
being worn at all time.
Possible Consequences
Following occupational health and safety hazards would be encountered in
during the decommissioning phase:
Falling from height;
Components falling from heaight;
Working on live electrical wire and electrical safety;
Exposure to electric magnetic field.
Embedded Provisions
The sub-contractors carrying out the decomissioning works have health and
safety policy and system in place that are overseen by OUWPPL and Suzlon
personnel and ensured that they are followed by staff and labour at all times.
Significance of Impact
The impact occupational health and safety during the decommissioning phase
of the Project is assessed to be moderate.
Additional Mitigation Measures
The workers (both regular and contractual) on the project should be
provided with trainings on the Health and Safety policy in place, and their
role in the same and refresher courses will be provided throughout the life
of the project
Establish a grievance redressal mechanism in place, to allow for the
employees and workers to report any concern or grievance related to work
activities
Put in place measures to reduce the risk of prevalence of diseases,
including screening of workers, undertaking health awareness amongst
the workers, implementation of vector control programs, avoiding
presence of unsanitary conditions and better facilities in the project site,
such as safe drinking water, proper waste collection and disposal etc.
Residual Impact Significance
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
194
The residual impact due to the Project on air quality will be minor after the
adoption of mitigation measures.
Table 7.32 Impact Significance on Occupational Health and Safety: Decommissioning
Phase
Impact Occupational Health and Safety: Decommissioning phase
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to Project Footprint area
Frequency Project life cycle : Decomissioning Phase
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible small Medium Large
Resource/Receptor
Sensitivity Low Medium High
Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered to be Moderate
Significance of Residual Impacts
Resource/Receptor
Sensitivity Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of Residual Impacts is considered Minor
7.5.6 Ambient Noise Levels
The source of ambient noise impact will vary from phase to phase. The phase-
wise project impact assessment is given in subsequent sections.
Contruction Phase
Context
The Project is located in a rural setting and therefore prescribes to CPCB and
WHO standards set for residential areas (Day time Leq = 55).
Baseline conditions
The noise monitoring on the Project site (See Section 5.4.2) shows that noise
levels in selected points across the study area fall below CPCB/WHO
standards.
Receptors
With respect to human receptors, there are receptors in the Project Area and
have been elaborated upon in Section 2 of this Report.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
195
Construction Phase activities
The list of project activities that might result in noise impacts is given below:
Noise from heavy vehicular traffic movement;
Noise from increased workforce and construction/demolition; and
Noise from cranes, drillers, bulldozers, excavators, etc.; and
Noise from DG sets.
Construction work is expected to last for about 04-06 months and construction
activities will be restricted to day time. Noise generation from select
construction equipment and machinery utilized in the construction of a wind
farm are presented in Table 7.33. Specific information about types, quantities,
and operating schedules of the construction equipment was not available at
the time of assessment and therefore, assumptions have made regarding the
type, number and Sound Power Levels (SPLs) of construction equipment,
based on similar projects and publicly available data. It has been assumed
that only one of each type of equipment will be on-site during any day or
night period. Re-assessment of noise levels may be required if the actual
construction equipment inventory and SPL vary from the assumed list.
Table 7.33 Assumed construction equipment sound pressure level inventory
Construction Equipment Average Noise Level at 50ft [dB(A)]
Bulldozer 82
Backhoe 78
Loaders 79
Vibratory roller 102
Fuel truck 85
Cranes 81
Dump truck 76
Grader 85
Compressors 78
Generators 85
Rock drill 81
Grader 85
Concrete mixer truck 79
Concrete pump truck 81
Scraper 85
Source: The SPLs of the construction equipment have been taken from FHWA noise specification 721.5601
and ERM’s internal database
1 Construction Noise Handbook. FHWA-HEP-06-15; DOTVNTSC-FHWA-06-02; NTIS No. PB2006-109102. Final Report
August 2006 (updated5/20/2010). <http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/construction_noise/handbook
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
196
Impact Significance
The WTG locations are located in the vicinity of the villages as described in
Section 2 of the report. With respect to human receptors, the structures are
located in the vicinity with the residents staying overnight. The construction
work that is expected to produce noise levels will be limited to a period of 04-
06 months only. However, as per the ambient noise level results presented in
Table 5.4.8, the results have been observed to be below the CPCB and WHO
limits. Taking the above facts into account, the overall impact significance for
ambient noise levels during the construction phase has been assessed to be
minor.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures are proposed to reduce noise impacts on
surrounding receptors during the construction of the Project:
Limit the number of heavy vehicles required for the Project to only those
that are necessary;
Access roads for the Project should avoid villages and communities to
prevent noise from heavy vehicular traffic to the extent possible;
Heavy vehicles should limit use of engine breaking to prevent excessive
noise;
All construction work should be carried out during daytime hours (6:00
am to 10:00 am as per CPCB limits);
Vehicles and equipment used for the Project should be well maintained
and oiled to prevent excess noise during construction; and
Significance of Residual Impacts
After implementation of mitigation measures, the significance of residual
impacts will be minor.
Table 7.34 Noise generation from construction activities and transportation of man/
material
Impact Noise generation from construction activities and transportation of man/
material
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to Project footprint area and surrounding communities
Frequency Construction Phase
Likelihood Likely
Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
197
Impact Noise generation from construction activities and transportation of man/
material
Resource/
Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered minor.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/
Receptor
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered minor.
Operation and Maintenance Phase
Sources of Wind Turbine Sound
The sources of noise emitted from operating wind turbines can be divided into
two categories: (a) mechanical noise, from interaction of turbine components;
and (b) aerodynamic noise, produced by the flow of air over blades.
Mechanical sounds originate from the relative motion of mechanical
components and the dynamic response among them. Sources of such sounds
include:
Gearbox;
Generator;
Yaw drives;
Cooling fans; and
Auxiliary equipment (e.g. hydraulics)
Aerodynamic sound is typically the largest component of wind turbine
acoustic emissions. It originates from the flow of air around the blades.
Aerodynamic sound generally increases with rotor speed.
The Project comprises of 48 WTGs of Suzlon make i.e S111, each having a
rated capacity of 2.1 MW with a hub height of 90 m. The noise generation from
the Suzlon S111 turbines have been taken into consideration during strong
m/s at 10 m height) i.e. 105.8 dB(A)
for the noise assessment.
Methodology: The environmental noise prediction model Nord 2000 (an in-
built calculation module in WindPro 3.0) and was used for modelling noise
emissions from the WTGs. In order to consider worst case scenario (with
strong wind conditions), it has been assumed that the WTGs are operational at
m/s at 10 m height (which is equivalent to
approximately 11.3 m/s at hub height). Operating of WTGs with 100% usage
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
198
scenario was modelled to cover the operation phase of the Project. In addition,
to represent a worst-case scenario for the assessment, all WTGs were assumed
to be operating simultaneously and for 24 hours. As a conservative approach
to the assessment, atmospheric absorption during sound transmission was not
included in the assessment. Local terrain has been considered for putting
noise sources as well as receptors in the model. It should be noted that
sensitive receptors were observed during the WTG profiling and
environmental survey and have been utilised for this study.
Noise Sensitive Receptors: A total of three scattered houses, one warehouse
and three village settlements (partially) namely Nakalapalli, Beluguppa Tanda
and Thaggurgparthy fall within the study domain of 500 m around the project
WTGs. The noise sensitive receptors with respect to WTGs are presented in
Figure 7.3.
Predicted Noise Levels at Receptors: The predicted noise levels within the
study domain with strong wind conditions (8 m/s) are presented in Figure 7.4.
The predicted noise level at one receptor within the study domain has been
presented in Table 7.35.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
199
Figure 7.3 Map showing the 48 WTGs and the Noise Sensitive Receptors in the Project Area
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
200
Figure 7.4 Noise map showing 48WTG locations, noise locations and wind speed under strong wind conditions (8 m/s)
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
201
Table 7.35 Predicted Noise Levels at Noise Receptors during Operation Phase of Project with normal wind conditions.
Receptor Code Zone Easting (mE) Northing (mN) Location Nearest WTG Approximate
Distance and
Direction of WTG
from location
Baseline Sound
Pressure Levels
at Receptors,
Leq (dBA)
Predicted Sound
Pressure Levels
at Receptors,
Leq (dBA)
(Strong Wind)
Total Sound
Pressure Level
(Baseline +
Predicted), Leq
(dBA) (Strong
Wind)
Applicable
Standard (dB(A))
per Landuse
Leq d Leq n Leq d Leq n Leq d Leq n Day Night
Nakalapalli Village 43 P
726240 1628953
Nakalapally Village
BLG-015 Within 500 m radius 52.1 43.6 40.7 40.7 52.4 45.4 55 45
Beluguppa Tanda Village 43 P 728579 1626874 Beluguppa Tanda Village BLG-024 Within 500 m radius 52.3 43.8 41.9 41.9 52.7 46.0 55 45
H1-House 43 P 722977 1629494 Sreerangapuram Village BLG-013 0.37 km SSW 53.7 44.5 47.4 47.4 54.6 49.2 55 45
H2-House 43 P 722919 1629610 Sreerangapuram Village BLG-013 0.32 km SSW 53.7 44.5 46.4 46.4 54.4 48.6 55 45
H3-House 43 P 723180 1630275 Sreerangapuram Village BLG-013 0.45 km N 53.7 44.5 40.5 40.5 40.5 46.0 55 45
W1-Warehouse 43 P 730409 1626888 Beluguppa Village BLG-080 0.46 km W - - 41.3 41.3 41.3 41.3 55 45
Thagguparthy Village 43 P 737079 1628822 Thaguparthy Village BLG-157 Within 500 m radius 53.1 44 46.9 46.9 54.0 48.7 55 45 (1) Predicted noise levels during day and night time will be same as the operation of WTGs has been considered 24 hours and no variation of wind speed during day and night-time is considered in this assessment. (2) IFC/WB EHS Guidelines: Noise Management dated April 30, 2007 gives, Noise level guidelines for Residential; institutional and educational receptors in daytime (07:22:00) and night time (22:00-7:00) as 55 and 45 one hour Leq dB(A)
respectively. For industrial and commercial receptors it is 70 one hour Leq dB(A) for both night and day time.
(3) Noise standards notified by the MoEFCC vide gazette notification dated 14 February 2000 as amended in January 2010 based on the A weighted equivalent noise level (Leq) for residential areas.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
202
As observed in Table 7.35, the ambient day time noise levels are within the
limits as prescribed by the CPCB. However, the night time noise levels show
slightly elevated level from the applicable standard i.e. 45.5 dB(A) under
strong wind conditions of 08 m/s. The WTGS that exhibit this trend are BLG-
015, BLG-024, BLG-013, BLG-013, BLG-080, and BLG-157.
Therefore the impact of noise as a result of WTG operating during the daytime
has been envisaged to be minor and night time has been envisaged to be
moderate.
Mitigation Measures
A solid noise barrier should be provided in order reduce the noise impact
at night, if the receptor is being used as permanent residential facility and
the monitored noise levels confirm the noise levels more than 5 dB(A)
higher than the applicable standard;
WTGs should be regularly serviced and maintained;
Periodic monitoring of noise near to the sources of generation to ensure
compliance with design specification; and
In case of complaints of higher noise levels and discomfort, received from
the inhabitants of nearby settlements, possibility of putting noise barriers
near to the receptor need to be considered.
Table 7.36 Noise generation from operation of the WTGs – day time
Impact Noise generation from operation of the WTGs – Day time
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to within 500 m of WTGs. BLG-015, BLG-024, BLG-013, BLG-013,
BLG-080, BLG-157 and BLG-158.
Frequency Entire Operation phase of Project
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity Low Medium High
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered as minor
Significance of Residual Impact
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/Receptor
Sensitivity Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered negligible
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
203
Table 7.37 Noise generation from operation of the WTGs – day time
Impact Noise generation from operation of the WTGs – Night time
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to within 500 m of WTGs BLG-015, BLG-024, BLG-013, BLG-013,
BLG-080, BLG-157 and BLG-157.
Frequency Entire Operation phase of Project
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity Low Medium High
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered as moderate
Significance of Residual Impact
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/Receptor
Sensitivity Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered minor.
Significance of Residual Impact
By implementing the above mitigation measures, the residual impact due to
the Project on noise is envisaged to be negligible with regard to day time and
minor with regard to nigh time noise.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
204
7.6 KEY ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS
Interactions that are likely to lead to significant impacts on ecology and
biodiversity in the study area are listed in Table 7.38 and will be the focus of
the impact assessment.
Table 7.38 Identified interactions that are likely to result in significant impacts
S. N. Potential Impacts Causes for Impacts
1. Permanent and/or temporary
loss of habitat (terrestrial and
aquatic) and
burrowing/nesting grounds.
Removal of vegetation from open areas will affect
mammalian species and nesting/shelter habitat for
bird species;
Excavation and construction will affect burrowing
species through loss of habitat, modify species
composition in the area and create disturbing
levels of noise for sensitive species; and
Sedimentation or contamination of any water
bodies could negatively affect species that rely on
aquatic habitats.
2. Disturbance and displacement
of resident species due to
noise, light, anthropogenic
movement, etc.
Increased movement of vehicles and people
increases stress levels of fauna and causes
displacement from areas of anthropogenic activity;
and
Noise, light and unattended (and uncovered)
wastes can attract or repel faunal species that are
affected by waste
3. Mortality as a result of
vehicular and machine
operations
Road kills especially for smaller mammalian
species, reptiles and amphibians that utilize
transition habitats near construction sites or
motorable roads.
4. Mortality as a result of worker
influx and improved
community access from
hunting, trapping and
poaching.
Improper regulation of demographic influx that
allows for increased trapping and killing of
resident wildlife.
5. Collision and mortality risk to
avifauna and bats from
operating wind turbine blades
Operation of the wind farm acts as a hazard to
flying birds and bats that might collide with the
turbine components or be affected by changes in
the pressure created by blade movement; and
Multiple wind farms in the area can exponentially
increase the impact levels on avifaunal species with
regards to collision related mortalities, energy
expedition to avoid wind turbine blades and
inaccessibility to certain habitats. Excessive wind
farm construction also changes the landscape to
open plains terrain and promotes a different
species composition.
6. Collision and electrical
hazards from transmission
infrastructure on avifauna
Transmission lines create an electrical hazard to the
large number of passerine (“perching”) birds and
raptors found in the project study area.
Assessment Criteria
ERM Impact Assessment Standards defines sensitivity of ecological receptors
by determining the significance of effects on species and habitats separately.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
205
The significance tables for species and habitats are given in Table 7.39 and
Table 7.40 respectively.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
206
Table 7.39 Habitat-Impact Assessment Criteria
Habitat Sensitivity/ Value Magnitude of Effect on Baseline Habitats
Negligible Small Medium Large
Effect is within
the normal
range of
variation
Affects only a small
area of habitat, such
that there is no loss
of viability/
function of the
habitat
Affects part of the
habitat but does not
threaten the long-
term viability/
function of the
habitat
Affects the entire
habitat, or a significant
portion of it, and the
long-term viability/
function of the habitat
is threatened.
Negligible Habitats with negligible interest for biodiversity. Not
significant Not significant Not significant Not significant
Low Habitats with no, or only a local designation / recognition,
habitats of significance for species listed as of Least
Concern (LC) on IUCN Red List of Threatened Species,
habitats which are common and widespread within the
region, or with low conservation interest based on expert
opinion.
Not
significant Not significant Minor Moderate
Medium Habitats within nationally designated or recognised areas,
habitats of significant importance to globally Vulnerable
(VU) Near Threatened (NT), or Data Deficient (DD)
species, habitats of significant importance for nationally
restricted range species, habitats supporting nationally
significant concentrations of migratory species and / or
congregatory species, and low value habitats used by
species of medium value.
Not
significant Minor Moderate Major
High Habitats within internationally designated or recognised
areas; habitats of significant importance to globally
Critically Endangered (CR) or Endangered (EN) species,
habitats of significant importance to endemic and/or
globally restricted-range species, habitats supporting
globally significant concentrations of migratory species and
/ or congregatory species, highly threatened and/or
unique ecosystems, areas associated with key evolutionary
species, and low or medium value habitats used by high
value species.
Not
significant Moderate Major Critical
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
207
Table 7.40 Species-Impact Assessment Criteria
Baseline Species Sensitivity/ Value Magnitude of Effect on Species
Negligible Small Medium Large
Effect is within
the normal range
of variation for
the population of
the species
Effect does not
cause a
substantial
change in the
population of the
species or other
species
dependent on it
Effect causes a substantial
change in abundance
and/or reduction in
distribution of a
population over one, or
more generations, but does
not threatened the long
term viability/ function of
that population dependent
on it.
Affects entire population, or a
significant part of it causing a
substantial decline in abundance
and/or change in and recovery of
the population (or another
dependent on it) is not possible
either at all, or within several
generations due to natural
recruitment (reproduction,
immigration from unaffected
areas).
Negligible Species with no specific value or
importance attached to them. Not significant Not significant Not significant Not significant
Low Species and sub-species of LC on the
IUCN Red List, or not meeting criteria
for medium or high value.
Not significant Not significant Minor Moderate
Medium Species on IUCN Red List as VU, NT, or
DD, species protected under national
legislation, nationally restricted range
species, nationally important numbers
of migratory, or congregatory species,
species not meeting criteria for high
value, and species vital to the survival of
a medium value species.
Not significant Minor Moderate Major
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
208
Baseline Species Sensitivity/ Value Magnitude of Effect on Species
Negligible Small Medium Large
High Species on IUCN Red List as CR, or EN.
Species having a globally restricted
range (i.e. plants endemic to a site, or
found globally at fewer than 10 sites,
fauna having a distribution range (or
globally breeding range for bird species)
less than 50,000 km2), internationally
important numbers of migratory, or
congregatory species, key evolutionary
species, and species vital to the survival
of a high value species.
Not significant Moderate Major Critical
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
209
The following section analyses the impacts shown in Table 7.38 with respect to
sensitive habitat or species described in the ecological baseline. The impacts
have been described by phases in the wind farm project life cycle with
majority of the impacts coming from the construction and operation phases of
the project.
7.6.2 Impacts during construction Phase
The biggest source of ecological impacts in the construction phase is
associated with the clearing of vegetation. Impacts from the construction
phase of the project on the local ecology have been assessed with respect to
the following activities:
Removal of vegetation from agricultural land for the WTG foundation
construction and ancillary facilities:
o Impact on scrubland species and the loss of connectivity between
habitats or to resources within a habitat, and
Impacts from excavation and construction activity on habitats and
sensitive species:
o Impact on burrowing species, and
o Effect of sediment and contaminant input into surrounding water
bodies; and
Laying of access and internal roads for the project.
Laying of transmission lines and transmission towers
Impact due to Vegetation Clearance
Context
Vegetation clearance is the first step in the establishment of labour camps,
access/internal roads and excavation for the erection of WTG foundations and
ancillary facilities. Clearing of vegetation from agricultural land further
reduces options for nesting habitat, shelter from predators, foraging resources,
shade, perching habitat and breeding sites. The loss of vegetation can also
have a negative effect on soil quality and hamper survival of floral species,
burrowing faunal species and foraging resources for herbivores in the area.
Embedded/ In-built Controls
The impacts during the construction activity will be short term and the
construction of the project will be executed in a phased manner. Clearance of
vegetation shall be limited to WTG erection site comprising of laydown and
crane movement area. The clearance shall be limited to duration required and
once the construction activities will cease, the vegetation should be allowed to
grow naturally.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
210
Significance of Impacts
The significance of impacts from vegetation clearance is being assessed as per
Table 7.39 for agricultural land and Table 7.40 for small mammal species,
herpetofauna and avifaunal species.
Vegetation clearance for the construction activities will lead to removal of
vegetation at the WTG location and access roads. The ecological baseline
section reveal that the tree species located at or within the immediate vicinity
of the WTG locations are Azadirachta indica, Ficus religiosa, Prosopis cineraria,
Tamarindus indica, Albizia saman, Millettia pinnata, Cocos nucifera, Delonix regia,
Moringa oleifera and Borassus flabellifer. Construction of WTG sites could lead to
clearance of these tree species. In addition, vegetation clearance could also
remove few shrub and herb species. Vegetation clearance will lead to habitat
disturbance for reptiles such as Indian Rat snake (Ptyas mucosus), Oriental
Garden Lizard (Calotes versicolor), birds like Indian peafowl (Pavo cristatus),
Large grey babbler (Turdoises malcolmi), Ashy crowned Sparrow Lark
(Eremopterix griseus), Rufous Tailed Lark (Ammomanes phoenicura) etc. and
mammals such as Blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra), Indian Pangolin (Manis
crassicaudata), Indian Grey Mongoose (Herpestes edwardsii) and Indian Hare
(Lepus nigricollis) etc.
The clearance of vegetation is expected to have an impact on habitat for
species (birds, mammals and some reptiles) that utilize those resources.
However, there is substantial habitat for these species in the region and any
impact within the wind farm area is unlikely to cause loss of habitat viability
and function in the region.
Impact magnitude is thereby considered Small as per Table 7.39
The sensitivity of these habitats is considered High as per Table 7.39 as they
may have some significance for IUCN Endangered species (viz. Indian
Pangolin), do not have any recognized conservation areas and are common
and widespread.
One Endangered species, the Indian Pangolin and two Near Threatened
species, the Red-necked Falcon and Blackbuck are dependent on agricultural
habitats. The site has several bird species and two mammalian species (Indian
Pangolin and Blackbuck) protected under Schedule I of the IWPA and
therefore the site has been deemed to have High sensitivity (as per Table 7.40).
The impacts described above will not cause a significant change in the
population of these species and therefore the impact magnitude has been
deemed small (as per Table 7.40).
The overall impact significance has been assessed as moderate for habitats and
moderate for species.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
211
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures will further reduce the impact significance
on the habitat and species:
Vegetation disturbance and clearance should be restricted to the project
activity area – location of laydown area, labour camp, construction
activities and storage areas;
Areas with vegetation patches around water sources should be avoided
during the planning of access/internal roads, storage areas, labour camps
and ancillary facilities;
Top soil that is disturbed should be stored separately for restoration of the
habitat;
Unnecessary disturbance of neighbouring vegetation due to off-road
vehicular movement, fuel wood procurement, needless expansion of
labour camp and destruction of floral resources should be prohibited;
Simultaneous revegetation on outskirts of project activity area should be
practiced for areas that are determined to have loose or unstable soil to
avoid erosion;
Local grass species should be seeded in disturbed areas during monsoon
season; and
Strict prohibition should be maintained on use of fuel wood and shrubs from nearby areas as kitchen fuel.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Removal of vegetation can have a direct and indirect impact on the local
ecology. The impact is limited to the construction phase of the project,
following which the vegetation can recover. The significance of the residual
impacts is Not Significant for species.
Table 7.41 Impact significance of vegetation clearance during the construction phase
Impact Clearance of vegetation
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to construction area and immediate surroundings
Frequency Construction phase
Likelihood Likely
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity
(Agricultural lands) Low Medium High
Resource Sensitivity
(Species) Low Medium High
Impact Significance Not Significant Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered Moderate for habitat and species.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
212
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Residual Impact
Significance
Not Significant Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered Not Significant for species.
Construction Activities
Context
Vegetation clearance and habitat disturbance are two of the biggest impacts
from construction activities and have already been covered in the previous
section. This category will focus on excavation, increased anthropogenic
movement (men and transport) in the project study area, noise and increased
chance of sedimentation/contamination of water resources. These activities
are assessed with respect to disturbance of habitats and species.
Excavation for the construction of the WTG foundation and ancillary facilities
will have a direct impact on burrowing fauna, such as the Indian Pangolin and
an indirect impact on flora/fauna through the changing of soil properties. A
decrease in soil quality will affect surrounding vegetation and reduce foraging
resources for herbivorous species. Increased sediment input or any
contaminant input into local water bodies, decreases the water quality and
results in loss of foraging resources for dependent fauna, water resources for
flora and habitat for herpetofauna.
Anthropogenic movement will result in an increased stress placed on fauna in
the area that will have to remain alert for an extended period of time and may
prevent proper breeding, nesting, mating, socializing and foraging. Noise
from anthropogenic movement (men and transport) along with the
construction activities may further disturb fauna in the nearby areas.
Embedded/ In-built Controls
The labour force and the supervisory staff will be provided in-house and
external trainings for the situations dealing with wildlife encounters and dos
and don’ts while dealing with these situations. Selection of labour camps,
batching plants and equipment laydown areas will be located away from the
areas where the wildlife movement is reported.
Significance of Impacts
The significance of impacts from construction activities is being assessed as
per Table 7.39 for agricultural land and water bodies and Table 7.40 for
burrowing species (Indian grey mongoose, snakes and lizards) and aquatic
species (amphibians and birds).
Excavation activities can have a detrimental impact on the soil properties in
the area that will have an effect on burrowing species, neighbouring flora and
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
213
fauna. Burrowing animals including Indian Pangolin, snakes (Indian Rat
snake, Russell’s Viper etc.), ground-roosting bird species and lizard
burrowing holes can be directly affected by excavation or indirectly affected
by the weakening of the soil layers. The weakening of soil layers will also
promote grass and shorter vegetation instead of denser scrub and can change
the floral and faunal composition in the area.
Aquatic species including several waders (egrets, herons, stilts and
sandpipers), waterfowl (Spot-billed Ducks, Bar-headed Geese), water birds
(cormorants, darters, ibis’es and waterhens) and amphibians (frogs and toads)
will be directly affected by the deterioration in water quality. For most of the
species, the effect will be through the loss of foraging resources. This is
because floral composition can change from the changes in water quality, as
species that are more tolerant to harsher water conditions would thrive along
the banks of the waterbody.
Anthropogenic movement will create an increased stress on faunal species.
Mammals, birds and reptiles in the project study area are particularly
susceptible to this movement. Mammal species are also susceptible to higher
noise levels from anthropogenic movement and construction due to their
better auditory perception. Noises can affect mating and breeding behaviour
in all species that utilize sound to communicate with one another and find
suitable mates.
The sensitivity of these habitats is considered High as per Table 7.2 as they
may have some significance for IUCN Endangered species and Schedule I
mammal species. Sensitivity of species is considered High as per Table 7.3 as
there are globally threatened species and Schedule I mammal species as per
IWPA (1972), which may experience impacts.
Impact magnitude on habitat is considered Small as impacts occur over a
small area and do not affect habitat function/viability regionally. Impact
magnitude on species is considered Small as they do not cause a significant
change to the population of these species.
The overall impact significance has been assessed as Moderate for habitat and
Moderate for species.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures will further reduce the impact significance
on the habitat and species:
Construction and transportation activities should be avoided at night (6:00
pm to 6:00 am) and should particularly avoid high activity areas like tree
clusters or water bodies during dawn (6:00 am to 7:30 am) and dusk (5:00
pm to 6:00 pm);
Areas with pre-existing burrows or ground roosting sites of birds should
be avoided when possible;
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
214
Temporary barriers should be installed on excavated areas;
Hazardous materials should not be stored near natural drainage channels;
Simultaneous revegetation on outskirts of project activity area should be
practiced for areas that have loose or unstable soil to avoid erosion and
sedimentation;
Efforts should be made to minimize construction noise and the use of
noise barriers should be considered for high noise levels;
Waste materials should be cleared in a timely manner and the use of
artificial lights should be minimized so as to not attract wildlife;
Good housekeeping should be followed for construction activities, waste
packaging material should be properly disposed;
Proper sanitation facilities should be provided at the labour camps;
Labour movement should be restricted between construction camps and
construction sites;
Vehicle movement should be restricted in areas and times where wildlife
is most active;
Anti-poaching, trapping and hunting policy among employees and
contractors should be strictly enforced; and
General awareness regarding fauna should be enhanced through trainings,
posters, etc. among the staff and labourers.
Residual Impact Significance
The implementation of suggested mitigation measures can significantly
reduce the impacts from excavation and sedimentation/contamination but
there will still be some impacts due to noise and anthropogenic movement.
The residual impacts for species will remain at Minor as while impacts of
construction activity will be reduced there will continue to be some
disturbance to fauna and flora.
Table 7.42 Impact significance of construction activities during the construction phase
Impact Impact significance of construction activities during the construction
phase
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Largely restricted to construction area and immediate surroundings
with potential to have impacts on water bodies
Frequency Construction phase
Likelihood Likely
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity
(Habitat) Low Medium High
Resource Sensitivity
(Species) Low Medium High
Impact Significance Not significant Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered Moderate for habitat and species.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
215
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Residual Impact
Significance
Not significant Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered Moderate for species
Laying of approach roads
Context
Approach roads are integral part of any wind farm projects as they are
established usually away from habitation and main commutation routes.
These approach roads are solely used for project related activities.
Construction of approach roads are the only activities in the construction
phase that can be adjusted to a large degree based on ecological concerns. The
construction of roads to connect the individual WTGs with the main access
road should be conducted with respect to the following ecological concerns
mentioned below:
Embedded/ In-built Controls
Avoidance of vegetation clusters;
Approach road should not be constructed in forest patches in proximity to
the WTGs;
Conducted with minimum clearance of vegetation with proper use of the
open barren spaces present on site;
Avoid large grasses or small shrubs that might be preferred habitat for
mammals and bird species;
Avoid ground roosting sites and previously burrowed holes when
possible; and
Consult with locals in regards to areas where mammal activities are
highest and these areas should be avoided for approach road construction.
Whenever feasible, existing village or tractor roads should be upgraded to
create an approach road minimizing the disturbances on local flora and fauna.
Significance of Impacts
The significance of impacts from construction activities is being assessed as
per Table 7.39 for open scrubland and agricultural lands and for burrowing
species, mammals and breeding birds.
The agricultural areas show the predominance of trees like Azadirachta indica,
Ficus religiosa, Prosopis cineraria, Tamarindus indica, Albizia saman, Millettia
pinnata, Cocos nucifera, Delonix regia, Moringa oleifera and Borassus flabellifer, and
shrubs like Argemone mexicana, Capparis decidua and Cassia auriculata.
Approach roads are generally unpaved and movement of vehicles in unpaved
roads often leads to dust deposition on nearby vegetation which may affect
photosynthesis, respiration, transpiration and overall affect the productivity.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
216
The faunal species most susceptible to approach road construction are ground
roosting birds, burrowing animals and mammalian species. In Belluguppa
wind farm these comprise:
Ground roosting birds: Larks, quails, nightjars, lapwings, etc.
Burrowing animals: Common fox, lizards, snakes, etc.
Mammalian species: Indian Pangolin and Blackbuck.
All of the above have preferred habitat for foraging, mating and
nesting/nurturing that could be affected by approach road construction.
Approach roads falling within natural pathways of mammal and reptile
species could increase the chances of road kill.
The sensitivity of these habitats is considered High as per Table 7.2 as they
have some significance for IUCN Endangered Species (viz. Indian Pangolin).
Sensitivity of species is considered High as there are globally threatened
species and Schedule I mammal species as per IWPA (1972), experiencing
these impacts.
Impact magnitude for habitat is considered Small as impacts occur over a
small area and do not affect habitat function/viability regionally. Furthermore
impacts to species are considered Small as they do not cause a significant
change to the population of these species.
The overall impact significance has been assessed as Moderate for habitats
and Moderate for species
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures will further reduce the impact significance
on the habitat and species:
It is recommended that construction of roads for the project be carried out
in a phased manner by focusing on clusters of WTGs at a given time to
allow impacted fauna to adjust to the disturbed areas;
Construction and transportation activities should be avoided at night (6:00
pm to 6:00 am) and if possible avoid times of high activity during dawn
(6:00 am to 7:30 am) and dusk (5:00 pm to 6:00 pm);
Anti-poaching and hunting policy should be strictly enforced;
Number of routes should be minimized for construction and
transportation;
Speed limit of vehicles plying on these routes should be kept to 10-15
km/hr to avoid road kill;
If access roads are created in key crossing points for herpetofauna and
smaller mammals, then culverts or alternate paths should be provided to
avoid road kill; and
When grasses or small shrubs are removed for access road construction,
replanting should be implemented after the construction phase to allow
mammals and birds to utilize these resources in the next breeding season.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
217
Residual Impact Significance
If the mitigation measures and in-built controls are followed then the residual
impacts for species can be reduced to Not significant.
Table 7.43 Impact significance of approach road laying during construction phase
Impact Construction of Approach roads
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to approach roads and construction areas
Frequency Construction phase
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity
(Habitat) Low Medium High
Resource Sensitivity
(Species) Low Medium High
Impact Significance Not Significant Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered Moderate for habitats and species.
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Residual Impact
Significance
Not Significant Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered Not significant both for habitat
and species.
7.6.3 Impacts during Operation Phase
The biggest source of ecological impacts in the operation phase is associated
avifauna and bat mortality and collision risk with operating wind turbine
blades and electrical hazards from transmission infrastructure. The impacts in
the operation phase are considerably larger due to the presence of multiple
wind farms in the Belluguppa area that multiply the hazards for flying bird
and bat species.
Impacts from the operation phase of the project on the local ecology have been
assessed with respect to the following activities:
Operating wind turbine blades:
o Collision and mortality risks to birds and bats;
o Air pressure changes from blade movement;
o Behavioural avoidance by flying species and increased energy
expenditure; and
o Barrier effects that lead to connectivity issues and access to resources.
Collision and electrical hazards from transmission infrastructure:
o Electrical hazards to birds while perching and taking off from
transmission lines; and
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
218
o Risk of colliding with the transmission lines.
Collision and mortality risk to avifauna and bats from operating wind
turbine blades
Context
An operational wind farm has several wind turbine generators located 200m
to 1 km apart (on average) that rotate at speeds relative to the wind. The
rotating blades and the varying speeds of their movement is a collision hazard
to flying birds and bats. The hazard is especially pronounced for birds
categorized as ‘aerial hunters’, that is, birds that hunt and catch prey in the air.
The make of the installed WTG is S111-2.1 MW, and flying birds and bats are
susceptible if they fly at a height of 34 to 146 meters from the ground in close
vicinity to the operating turbines. A bird that avoids collision with the blades
can still be impacted by the visual movement of the blades, noise from the
rotation and/or low air pressure areas created by the blades.
Birds adjust to the presence of the wind farm by changing their behaviour.
Flight deviation, alternate resource utilization, dispersion from the wind farm
area and changing flight heights are types of behavioural changes that the
birds can utilize to adjust to the wind farm. These avoidance behaviours
however, can still result in night collisions, foggy conditions and collisions
due to sudden change in wind speeds. The energy expenditure to avoid the
wind farm can be a strain on birds and decrease energy reserves for foraging,
hunting, socializing and breeding. The avoidance and dispersion can also lead
to loss of foraging resources, habitats and migration pathways.
Embedded / In-built Controls
Embedded controls for wind farm operation would need to be adopted in the
planning and construction stage by designing the wind farm to minimize
collision risk. Some in-built controls are listed below:
Inter-turbine distance should be large enough that birds can avoid turbine
blades and utilize minimal energy while doing so;
Avoid siting of WTGs near water bodies, tree clusters, etc.; and
WTGs should be sited in areas that are visible from a manoeuvrable
distance for flying species and shouldn’t be located near sudden changes
of elevation, large trees or be blocked by any manmade/natural structure.
Significance of Impacts
The significance of impacts from hazards associated with turbine blade
movement is being assessed as per Table 7.39 for bird and bat species.
The birds most susceptible to wind farm collisions are aerial hunters such as
the Black shouldered Kite (Elanus axillaris), Red-necked Falcon (Falco
chicquera), Brahminy Kite (Haliastur indus), Shikra (Accipiter badius), Black Kite
(Milvus migrans), Oriental Honey Buzzard (Pernis ptilorhynchus), White-eyed
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
219
Buzzard (Butastur teesa), Tawny Eagle (Aquila rapax), Short-toed Snake Eagle
(Circaetus gallicus) and Crested Serpent Eagle (Spilornis cheela). There could be
an increase in collision risk with WTG’s to water birds (terns, ibis’es, herons &
storks) moving from the Kanekallu Tank and Jeddipalli Reservoir to other
wetlands and water bodies in the study area. The birds are at risk of collision
if they either fly in the high or low to moderate risk zones as shown below in
Figure 7.5. The collision risk increases when there is high wind and low
visibility.
Figure 7.5 Schematic representation of collision risk zones to birds and bats
Wind turbine placement also plays a role in barrier effects and habitat
utilization of birds. In the study area, this includes placement of wind turbine
generators near water bodies, in small open scrub patches, agricultural land,
near several previously dried water bodies.
The aforementioned impacts are common to most wind farms in the world.
One of the concerns that merits further investigation is the presence of other
wind farms within 5 km of the existing wind farm. The presence of other wind
farms can enhance the negative impacts on susceptible bird and bat species
and has to be analysed further.
The Black-bellied Tern is listed as Endangered and birds that are most
susceptible to wind farm collisions are protected by IWP Schedule I, therefore
the species sensitivity has been assessed as High. However as most of these
species are abundant it is unlikely that mortality from collisions or
electrocution will cause any changes in the population regionally, thus
magnitude of effect on species would be Small. Impacts from wind farm
operation are thereby deemed Moderate.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
220
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures will further reduce the impact significance
on avifaunal species:
Flash lamps on the WTGs will prevent bird collision at nights;
Waste materials should not be left lying around and if any waste is found
then it should be cleared immediately so as to not attract birds near the
WTG blades;
Avoid the use of areas of high bird concentrations;
Wind turbine generators should be properly maintained to ensure that
turbine blade speeds are regulated and blade throws are avoided
Restoring herb layers in the vicinity of the site to prevent raptors flying in
close vicinity of wind farm to prey on rodents;
Check should be imposed so that dead carcasses are not disposed near the
WTG areas so that the vultures are not attracted;
The study area falls within the CAF flight corridor (Figure 5.27). Baseline
data generation for bird species visiting the study area during migratory
season is required as the monitoring would give probable flight path of
migratory birds during their daily movement;
The study should also involve survey of bird species specific to water
bodies (ducks and geese) along with terrestrial migratory species which
may also be under threat of collision risk; and
Based on the outcome of the study additional mitigation measures shall be
suggested.
Residual Impact Significance
After implementation of mitigation measures, the significance of the impacts
is retained as Moderate as while mitigation methods may reduce mortality of
protected species, we do not anticipate complete cessation of mortality.
Table 7.44 Impact significance of collision and mortality risk to avifauna and bats from
operating wind turbine blades
Impact Bird & Bat Collision Risk
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to core zone of the wind farm as well as a displacement radius
of 1 km for birds that are showing avoidance behaviour
Frequency Operation phase
Likelihood Likely
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity
(Species) Low Medium High
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered Moderate for flying fauna
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
221
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered Moderate for species
Collision and electrical hazards from transmission infrastructure
Context
Several species of birds identified during the ecological study were found
perched on wires and poles in the area. Fifty two kilometres of internal
transmission lines with approximately 1037 poles will be constructed. These
transmission lines and poles can potentially constitute an electrocution and
collision hazard to birds. Some birds also utilize the transmission towers for
nesting by placing the nests across wires or using holes in the tower itself.
Embedded/ In-built Control
There are no embedded controls to prevent birds from roosting/nesting on
transmission poles and colliding with transmission wires.
Significance of Impacts
Many avifaunal species observed during the ecological survey were perching
on existing transmission lines. The species included the Black-shouldered Kite,
Indian Roller, Indian Silverbill, Laughing Dove, Pied Bushchat, Purple
Sunbird, Small-green Bee-eater, White-breasted Kingfisher, Pied Kingfisher,
Long-tailed Shrike and Indian Hoopoe. The number of birds that utilize
electrical components for roosting can be considered a representative sample
of the number of birds that show this behaviour. The numbers could be higher
during breeding and migratory season due to greater nesting habitat required
and number of species present respectively. There could be an increase in
collision risk with transmission wires to water birds (terns, ibis’es, herons &
storks) moving from the Kanekallu Tank and Jeddipalli Reservoir to other
wetlands and water bodies in the study area.
Due to the presence of the Endangered Black-bellied Tern and the likelihood
that Schedule I species protected under the IWPA (1972) will use the
transmission poles, the species sensitivity is assessed as High. As these species
are common in the region and the impacts are unlikely to cause changes in the
population, the impact magnitude has been assessed as Small.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures will further reduce the impact significance
on avifaunal species:
The study area falls within the CAF flight corridor (Figure 5.27).
Collection of baseline data on migratory birds visiting the study area in
the migratory season by using vantage point methodology and
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
222
wetland surveys is required as the monitoring would give probable
flight path of migratory birds during their daily movement;
The study will also involve survey of bird species specific to water
bodies (ducks and geese) along with terrestrial migratory species
which may also be under threat of collision risk;
Based on the outcome of the study additional mitigation measures
shall be suggested;
Regular checking of the vacuums or holes in the towers to avoid
nesting by any of the birds;
The transmission poles should be raised with suspended insulators in
order to reduce the electrocution of bird species;
Bird-safe strain poles require insulating chains at least 60 cm in length
should be adopted; and
Marking overhead cables using diffractors and avoiding use in areas of
high bird concentrations of species vulnerable to collision.
Residual Impact Significance
After implementation of mitigation measures, the significance of residual
impacts will be Moderate. We retain this significance, as while the mitigation
measures are likely to reduce mortality, we do not expect complete cessation
of mortality.
Table 7.45 Impact significance of collision and electrical hazards from transmission
infrastructure on avifaunal species
Impact Electrocution hazards
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale
Limited to electrical components of the wind farm including wind
turbine generators, transmission lines (internal and external) and
transmission poles.
Frequency Operation phase
Likelihood Likely
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity
(Species) Low Medium High
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is Moderate for species.
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered Moderate.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
223
7.6.4 Cumulative Impact Assessment for Flying Fauna
The presence of other wind farms in the study area can contribute to
multiplying the impacts on the avifaunal species. Birds most susceptible to
this are aerial hunters, such as the Black shouldered Kite (Elanus axillaris),
Red-necked Falcon (Falco chicquera), Brahminy Kite (Haliastur indus), Shikra
(Accipiter badius), Black Kite (Milvus migrans), Oriental Honey Buzzard (Pernis
ptilorhynchus), White-eyed Buzzard (Butastur teesa), Tawny Eagle (Aquila
rapax), Short-toed Snake Eagle (Circaetus gallicus) and Crested Serpent Eagle
(Spilornis cheela).
As per Scottish Natural Heritage’s assessment of cumulative impacts of
onshore wind energy developments (1), the following needs to be factored into
a cumulative impact assessment for birds in wind farms:
Table 7.46 Summary of cumulative impacts
Cumulative Impact
Parameter
Relevance to
current study
Remarks
Construction of
wind farm near an
eco-sensitive area
Not Relevant The Belluguppa wind farm is not located in proximity
to any protected or Eco-sensitive area.
Threatened or
protected avifaunal
species found in the
project study area
Relevant Endangered, Near Threatened and 10 nationally
protected species were recorded in the study area.
Increased
disturbance on
avifaunal species
from anthropogenic
movement, noise
and visual hazards
from multiple wind
farms.
Relevant Whitfield and Roddick did a study on disturbance
distance for select bird species and found that
approximately 155 m is the median distance at which
breeding birds will enter an ‘alert’ state and
approximately 60 m is the median distances for
breeding birds to take flight.
Birds that are disturbed in this way have less suitable
habitat to move to.
Loss of habitat,
nesting and
foraging sites and
the resultant
displacement of
population
Relevant Continued difficulty in accessing resources means
that birds may change their overall range, territory
and flight patterns, no longer bringing birds to the
wind farm vicinity. A study by Pearce-Higgins et.
al (2) indicates that smaller raptors are displaced by
500-1000m, lapwings are displaced by 200-600m, pipit
are displaced by 500-600m and stonechats are
displaced by 400-800m from a wind turbine generator
on average. With other wind farms developed in
close proximity, free space between the windfarm
would reduce; reduction in space could lead to lack of
foraging and nesting sites and increased competition
Increased risk of
collisions
Relevant Collision risk is calculated as annual loss of avifauna
for the duration of the wind farm life cycle (~25-30
years). One of the factors that determine collision risk
is inter-turbine distance across all wind farms in the
area. The inter-turbine distance in the study area is
(1) http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A675503.pdf (2) Pearce-Higgins, J.W. et. al. 2009. The distribution of breeding birds around upland wind farms. Journal of Applied
Ecology. 46: 1323-1331
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
224
Cumulative Impact
Parameter
Relevance to
current study
Remarks
500m minimum but the inter-turbine distance as a
function of the other wind farms is undetermined and
would need to be obtained to understand the collision
risk.
Excessive energy
expenditure from
behavioural
avoidance and
behavioural
displacement
Relevant Birds that are disturbed or displaced will find
alternate routes to find foraging resources, nesting
habitat or migration pathways and would therefore
utilize more energy in the process. The presence of
multiple wind farms indicate that birds would need
even more energy to completely avoid wind turbine
generators or travel by even longer routes for
migration and daily flight patterns.
Increased noise and
visual impacts from
blade movement
Relevant The combined movement of wind turbine blades will
increase low pressure zones, visual impacts from
shadow flicker and noise on communities and
biodiversity. The impacts from the above are less than
collision and electrical risk associated with wind farm
but will contribute to the cumulative impacts on the
local ecology.
To determine the cumulative impacts for current study, it is recommended
that a desktop study be carried out to know the following;
Inter-turbine distance for other wind farms (operational, under
construction and proposed) in the area;
Presence of IWP Schedule I and any species not classified as “Least
Concern” according to IUCN Red List V 2016.1 from ecological baseline
studies carried out in adjoining wind farms;
Secondary information on avifaunal presence in all water bodies or habitat
features across a 5 km radius of other wind farm;
Basic modelling to understand habitats that would be inaccessible due to
wind farm design, bird displacement numbers as provided by Pearce-
Higgins et. al study; and
Basic modelling on anthropogenic activity in the area by obtaining
information on village census, industries/projects that are active in the
vicinity and any proposed projects that are coming up in the region in the
next 5 years.
A cumulative impact assessment will utilize the following formula:
Box 7.2 Cumulative Impact Assessment
Cumulative Impact Assessment
Collision Mortality Displacement Habitat Loss
displacement of susceptible bird species +
development.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
225
7.7 KEY SOCIAL IMPACTS
7.7.1 Impacts to local communities
Criteria
For the assessment of social impacts, the sensitivity and magnitude criteria
outlined in Table 7.47 and Table 7.48 respectively have been used.
The social impacts associated with the construction, operations and
decommissioning stages have been assessed qualitatively and in some cases
quantitatively (subject to availability of data), using professional judgement
and based on past experience from similar projects.
Table 7.47 Impact Magnitude for Local Communities
Extent / Duration / Scale / Frequency
Large
Change dominates over baseline conditions. Affects the majority of the area
or population in the area of influence and/or persists over many years. The
impact may be experienced over a regional or national area.
Medium
Clearly evident difference from baseline conditions. Tendency is that impact
affects a substantial area or number of people and/or is of medium duration.
Frequency may be occasional and impact may potentially be regional in
scale.
Small
Perceptible difference from baseline conditions. Tendency is that impact is
local, rare and affects a small proportion of receptors and is of a short
duration.
Negligible Change remains within the range commonly experienced within the
household or community.
Table 7.48 Receptor Sensitivity for Local Communities
Category
High Profound or multiple levels of vulnerability that undermine the ability to
adapt to changes brought by the Project.
Medium Some but few areas of vulnerability; but still retaining an ability to at least in
part adapt to change brought by the Project.
Low Minimal vulnerability; consequently with a high ability to adapt to changes
brought by the Project and opportunities associated with it.
On the basis of this understanding of magnitude and sensitivity, the
significance of impacts will be assessed, as depicted in the table below.
Table 7.49 Impact Significance Matrix
Receptor Sensitivity Impact Magnitude
Negligible Small Medium Large
Low Negligible Negligible Minor Moderate
Medium Negligible Minor Moderate Major
High Negligible Moderate Major Critical
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
226
Impact Significance on Community Health and Safety due to Traffic Hazards
Source of Impact
The receptors for impacts on community health and safety include settlements
in the close proximity of the project site (within 1km and along the access road
and transmission line (within 100 m from the centreline), which will be
exposed to health and safety impacts related to the project activities.
Since the project is in its operational phase the key community health and
safety risk include:
Cumulative impacts of increased traffic in the area owing to the numerous
wind farm projects in the area; and
Risk from collapse of WTG structures due to accidental blade throws and
natural disasters
Embedded/ In Built Control
Suzlon has a health and safety policy in place which includes community health and safety. The Policy states that Suzlon will ‘Proactively consult and communicate with employees and stakeholders about health, safety and environment matters.’ Consequently, all the drivers for Suzlon has been briefed and trained on vehicle safety and controlled speed. Significance of Impact
Based on the above the impact after implementing the embedded controls is
assessed to be moderate.
Additional Mitigation Measures
The following risk mitigation measures are suggested to minimize the
risks/hazards with the operational phase of the project on the community
health and safety:
As part of stakeholder engagement, the project will also propagate health
awareness amongst the community, including setting up of health camps,
The traffic movement for the project in the area will be regulated to ensure
road and pedestrian (including livestock) safety and the local community
should be given an orientation regarding traffic safety
Table 7.50 Impact Significance on Community Health and Safety due to Traffic Hazards
Impact Social and Community Health and Safety
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Limited to Project Footprint area
Frequency Project lifecycle
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible small Medium Large
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
227
Impact Social and Community Health and Safety
Resource/Receptor
Sensitivity Low Medium High
Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered Moderate
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of Residual Impacts is considered Minor
Significance of Residual Impacts
The Residual Impact Significance has envisaged to be minor.
Impacts to communities due to shadow flicker incidents
Overview
Shadow flicker is a term used to describe the pattern of alternating light
intensity observed when the rotating blades of a wind turbine cast a shadow
on a receptor under certain wind and light conditions. Shadow flicker occurs
under a limited range of conditions when the sun passes behind the hub of a
wind turbine and casts an intermittent shadow over neighbouring properties.
Indian energy planning and environmental policies and legislation contains no
specific shadow flicker requirements and recommendations. At present, only
Germany has detailed guidelines on limits and conditions for calculating
shadow impact.1 The International guidelines for shadow flicker assessment is
summarised in Box 7.3.
Box 7.3 International Guidelines for Shadow Flicker Assessment
(1) 1 These are found in “Hinweise zur Ermittlung und Beurteilung der optischen Immissionen von
Windenergianlagen” (WEA-Shattenwurf-Hinweise).
According to the German guidelines, the limit of the shadow is set by two factors:
orizon must be at least 3 degrees;
The maximum shadow impact for a neighbour to a wind farm according to the German
guidelines is:
case);
In Sweden and Denmark there are no official guidelines as yet on shadow flickering, but for
practical purposes, 10 hours (Denmark) and 8 hours (Sweden) real case (weather-dependent)
shadow impact is used as the limit. In the UK, no official limits are in force, however an
assessment must be made at all dwellings within ten rotor diameters of the turbine locations
(PPS22 (2004) for England), TAN8 for Wales). In Ireland, a worst-case 30 hours per year, 30
minutes per day limit has been set.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
228
Note: In India, at present there is no standard in case of non-forest land diversion for wind power
projects. However, as per Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEFCC) guidelines, a minimum
distance of 300 m is recommended between windmill and highways or village habitation.
Shadow flicker is most pronounced at sunrise and sunset when shadows are
the longest, and at high wind speeds (faster rotating blades leading to faster
flicker). A UK government report recommends that for inhabitants near wind
turbines, shadow flicker should be limited to 30 hours in a year and 30
minutes in a day1. There is anecdotal evidence internationally that shadow
flicker could lead to stress and headaches. There is also a fear that shadow
flicker, especially in the range of 2.5-50 Hertz (2.5-50 cycles per second) could
lead to seizures in epileptics and may also scare away livestock.
An analysis of those conditions that may lead to shadow flicker and the
location of potential sensitive receptors (residential and community
properties) is provided in this section. The timing and duration of this effect
can be theoretically calculated from the geometry of the wind turbines, their
orientation relative to nearby houses and the latitude of the potential site,
using specialised software such as WindPro 3.0. The results provide the total
number of hours in a year when a theoretical shadow flicker will occur. This
is most pronounced during sunrise and sunset when the sun’s angle is lower
and the resulting shadows are longer. However the actual shadow flicker
could be substantially lower compared to theoretical values because shadow
flicker does not occur where there is vegetation or other obstructions between
the turbines and the shadow receptors; if windows facing a turbine are fitted
with blinds or shutters; or if the sun is not shining brightly enough to cause
shadows. The theoretical calculations done by WindPro 3.0 does take into
account the reduction in shadow flicker due to topographic features, however
it does not take into account the reduction in shadow flicker due to these
onsite factors i.e. vegetation. Simple geometry relating to the position of the
sun and the angle of the turbine blades can also eliminate or significantly
reduce the effects of shadow flicker. In addition, shadow flicker will only
occur inside buildings where the flicker is occurring through a narrow
window opening.
Weather conditions at the site, such as bright sunshine, will greatly enhance
the occurrence and intensity of shadow flicker, whereas cloud density, haze or
fog will cause a reduction. Receptors further away from the turbines which
may have experienced a shadow flicker effect under bright sunshine
conditions will, as a result of these weather conditions, experience either no
effect or one which is greatly reduced in intensity. The distance between
receptors and turbines has a large effect on the intensity of shadow flicker.
Shadow flicker intensity can be defined as the difference in brightness
between the presence and absence of a shadow at any given location. This
study does not examine variations in intensity but rather the occurrence in
number of hours shadow flicker may occur, whether or not this is clearly
(2) (1) Draft EIA Guidelines Wind Power Sector, prepared by Centre for Science and Environment, New Delhi
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
229
distinct or barely noticeable. The assessment assumes a conservative worst
case of bright sunshine conditions in all periods when flicker may occur.
Considering all of the above points, the likelihood of shadow flicker occurring
is greatest when the circumstances listed below exist simultaneously.
The receptor is at a position which is between 130° clockwise (1) and
anticlockwise from north and located within 10 turbine rotor diameters of
the wind turbine (~1000 m).
The sun is shining and visible in the sky in line with the monthly mean
sun-shine hours at nearby location.
The wind speeds are between 3 m/s and 22 m/s and the turbine is
therefore in operation.
The turbine blades are perpendicular to the line between the sun and the
observer or receptor most of time as per reported wind mast data.
In India at present, there is no agreed level of shadow flicker identified as
causing a significant effect. However, considering the international guidelines
(refer to Box 7.3) a threshold of 30 hours per year has therefore been
considered and applied for this assessment.
Assessment Methodology and Modelling
Shadow flicker calculations have been made using WindPro 3.0. software. The
model used in this analysis is very conservative and assumes the following
conditions:
the mean monthly sunshine hours have been taken from the India
Meteorological Department (IMD) station at Chennai covering the data
period (1969 – 1993)2;
the wind turbines have been considered operational with wind speed
more than 3 m/s and for the same wind mast data has been considered,
which indicates that about 83% time of the year, the wind turbines will be
operational;
the blades of the wind turbines are perpendicular with northwest -
southeast orientation have been considered based on the predominant
wind direction available from the wind mast data at site, which could
result in maximum possible size circular/ elliptical;
there are no trees, buildings or vegetation on the surface which may
obscure the line of sight between shadow receptor and turbine;
the sun can be represented as a single point;
Flicker is ignored if sun is less than 3° above horizon (due to atmospheric
diffusion/ low radiation/ sheltering);
Huts with windows as well as concrete structures within settlements are
considered as shadow receptors1.
(1) It is acknowledged by this assessment however that India is at a lower latitude than the European countries and
therefore angles of shadow flicker may be narrower. (1) 2 Available in WindPro database of climatological data
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
230
The following data inputs were used in this study:
a digital elevation model of the site (National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) Data
at 30 m resolution);
latitude and longitude at centre of the site used to calculate the position of
the sun (calculated in GIS using WGS84);
mean monthly sun-shine hours recorded over a period of 25 years at a
nearby IMD solar radiation station (Chennai);
wind mast data at site for wind class and frequency distribution;
turbine locations – coordinates (identified in GIS);
turbine rotor diameter for Suzlon S111 turbines is 111 m;
hub height is 90 m;
tilt angle of the ‘window’ (always assumed vertical);
shadow receptors contain on openings measuring 0.9 m by 1.2 m facing
towards the closest wind turbines; and
height above ground level of the ‘window’ 0.9 m.
Receptors
The maximum horizontal distance between a receptor affected by shadow
flicker and turbine location for example has been identified as being equal to
the diameter of the turbine multiplied by ten. In this instance, turbine rotor
diameter is 111.80 m; and therefore an area envelope of 1000 m from the
nearest turbine is used in shadow flicker analyses. However, the shadow
receptors have been taken into consideration falling within 500 m from each of
the WTG as the impact of shadow flicker reduces with distance.
Based on the site walkthrough for the purpose of WTG profiling receptors
have been observed within 500 m and have been elaborated upon in the WTG
profiling in Chapter 2 of this report.
The Model – WindPro Shadow
SHADOW is the WindPro 3.0 calculation module that calculates how often
and in which intervals a specific neighbour or area will be affected by
shadows generated by one or more WTGs. These calculations are worst-case
scenarios (astronomical maximum shadow, i.e. calculations which are solely
based on the positions of the sun relative to the WTG). Shadow impact may
occur when the blades of a WTG pass through the sun’s rays seen from a
specific spot (e.g. a window in an adjacent settlement). If the weather is
overcast or calm, or if the wind direction forces the rotor plane of the WTG to
stand parallel with the line between the sun and the neighbour, the WTG will
not produce shadow impacts, but the impact will still appear in the
calculations. In other words, the calculation is a worst-case scenario, which
represents the maximum potential risk of shadow impact. A calendar can be
(1) 1 It is likely that some of these straw huts are also used as shaded structure for cattle and storage areas.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
231
printed for any specific point of observation, which indicates the exact days,
and time periods where shadow impact may occur. Apart from calculating the
potential shadow impact at a given neighbour, a map rendering the iso-lines
of the shadow impact can also be printed. This printout will render the
amount of shadow impact for any spot within the project area.
The calculation of the potential shadow impact at a given shadow receptor is
carried out simulating the situation. The position of the sun relative to the
WTG rotor disk and the resulting shadow is calculated in steps of 1 minute
throughout a complete year. If the shadow of the rotor disk (which in the
calculation is assumed solid) at any time casts a shadow reflection on the
window, which has been defined as a shadow receptor object, then this step
will be registered as 1 minute of potential shadow impact. The following
information is required:
The position of the WTGs (x, y, z coordinates)
The hub height and rotor diameter of the WTGs
The position of the shadow receptor object (x, y, z coordinates)
The size of the window and its orientation, both directional (relative to
south) and tilt (angle of window plane to the horizontal).
The geographic position (latitude and longitude) together with time zone
and daylight saving time information.
A simulation model, which holds information about the earth’s orbit and
rotation relative to the sun.
The map showing the WTGs of the project and the shadow receptor has been
presented in Figure 7.6. The map of shadow flicker in the real case scenario is
presented in Figure 7.7. The project shadow flicker assessment data overview
has been provided in Annex I. The project shadow calendar graphical has
been provided in Annex J.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
232
Figure 7.6 Map showing WTG and shadow receptor for the Project
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
233
Figure 7.7 Map showing WTG and shadow receptor for the Project: real case scenario
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
234
Table 7.51 Shadow Flicker Analysis for Receptors observed to be within 500 m of the WTGs
Shadow
Receptor Code
and Type
Village UTM Co-ordinates** Height
(m) (1) Nearest WTG Approximate Distance
from Nearest WTG
[m]
Real Case
Scenario (2)
X (m E) Y (m N) Shadow hours per
year [hr/year] *
A House Sreerangapuram 722979 1629496 470.7 BLG-014 0.37 km SSW 83:42
B House Sreerangapuram 722918 1629610 469 BLG-014 0.30 km SSW 0:00
C House Sreerangapuram 723180 1630274 465.5 BLG-014 0.43 km N 0:00
D House Nakalapalli 726066 1628871 474.9 BLG-015 0.45 km N 0:00
E House Nakalapalli 726116 1628810 471.6 BLG-015 0.40 km N 0:00
G House Beluguppa Tanda 728671 1627038 486.9 BLG-024 0.44 km E 27:42
H House Beluguppa Tanda 728579 1627011 486.5 BLG-024 0.37 km SSE 25:48
I House Beluguppa Tanda 728494 1626985 488.0 BLG-024 0.31 km SSE 0:00
J House Beluguppa Tanda 728447 1626915 487.0 BLG-024 0.34 km SSE 0:00
K House Beluguppa Tanda 728437 1626786 490.8 BLG-024 0.41 km SSE 0:00
L House Beluguppa Tanda 728442 1626709 491.0 BLG-024 0.48 km SSE 0:00
M House Beluguppa Tanda 728588 1626850 489.1 BLG-024 0.46 km SSE 0:00
N House Nakalapalli 726644 1629101 480.7 BLG-024 0.43 km SSW 7:16
O House Nakalapalli 726566 1629100 480.3 BLG-024 0.48 km SSE 5:56
P Warehouse Beluguppa 730422 1626883 476.3 BLG-080 0.48 km W 44:05
Q House Tagguparthy
737275 1628740
489.1
BLG-157 and
BLG-158 Within 500 m radius of
BLG-157 and BLG-158 0:00
R House Tagguparthy
737202 1628739
488.2
BLG-157 and
BLG-158 Within 500 m radius of
BLG-157 and BLG-158 0:00
S House Tagguparthy
737113 1628747
491.5
BLG-157 and
BLG-158 Within 500 m radius of
BLG-157 and BLG-158 0:00
(1) Height of WTG location above mean sea level (2) Real case scenario is based on climatic information of average sunshine hours in every month of a year based on minimum 25 years data of nearby IMD station. This is not linked with wind speed.
However, in real case scenario, availability of WTGs above cut-off velocity do considered which is generally 80 to 90% time of a year.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
235
Shadow
Receptor Code
and Type
Village UTM Co-ordinates** Height
(m) (1) Nearest WTG Approximate Distance
from Nearest WTG
[m]
Real Case
Scenario (2)
X (m E) Y (m N) Shadow hours per
year [hr/year] *
T House Tagguparthy
737016 1628752
489.8
BLG-157 and
BLG-158 Within 500 m radius of
BLG-157 and BLG-158 0:00
U House Tagguparthy
737287 1628795
489.9
BLG-157 and
BLG-158 Within 500 m radius of
BLG-157 and BLG-158 0:00
V House Tagguparthy
737198 1628801
487.7
BLG-157 and
BLG-158 Within 500 m radius of
BLG-157 and BLG-158 0:00
W House Tagguparthy
737112 1628806
488.5
BLG-157 and
BLG-158 Within 500 m radius of
BLG-157 and BLG-158 0:00
X House Tagguparthy
737059 1628864
488.7
BLG-157 and
BLG-158 Within 500 m radius of
BLG-157 and BLG-158 22:33
Y House Tagguparthy
736934 1628898
490.0
BLG-157 and
BLG-158 Within 500 m radius of
BLG-157 and BLG-158 29:22
(1) Height of WTG location above mean sea level (1) Real case scenario is based on climatic information of average sunshine hours in every month of a year based on minimum 25 years data of nearby IMD station. This is not linked with wind speed.
However, in real case scenario, availability of WTGs above cut-off velocity do considered which is generally 80 to 90% time of a year.
*Values highlighted in bold represent greater than 30 hours per year of shadow flicker.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
236
Impact Assessment
Given the guidelines of 30 hours or less per year is considered to be
acceptable, the operation of the wind farm theoretically results in shadow
flicker impacts that could be considered as significant for the purposes of this
study. The results show that theoretical shadow flickers in real case scenario
occurs at WTGs BLG-014 and BLG-080 with shadow flicker values of 83:42 and
44:05 shadow hours per year (Table 7.51). Based on the shadow flicker data,
the village of Thagguparthy falls within the 500 m radius of both, WTG BLG-
157 and WTG BLG-158, thereby leading to potential shadow flicker impacts in
the long term.
It is relevant to emphasise that predicted hours of shadow flicker effects are
real case scenarios with certain assumptions. Assumptions made during the
analysis include optimal meteorological, natural light and geometrical
conditions for the generation of shadow flicker. The assessment does not
account for trees or other obstructions that intervene between receptor and
turbine during times when effects may occur. The assessment calculation is
therefore an over estimation in the probability of effects. It should also be
noted that for shadow effects to occur, properties need to be occupied, with
blinds or curtains open and views to the wind turbine unobstructed.
However, for the purposes of assessment, it has been assumed that all worst-
case circumstances apply. The impact assessment of shadow flickering in this
regard is envisaged to be minor.
Mitigation Measures
There will be close monitoring through engagement with residents during the
operational phase where there are predicted impacts from shadow flicker. The
likelihood of direct line of sight to the location of proposed turbine locations
can be assessed visually and the potential for using screening like higher
fencing and planting trees can be explored at problem locations. The use of
curtains can also be explored. If these prove effective and the impacts
mitigated, the shutting down of turbines during certain environmental
conditions, which meet the physical requirements for theoretical shadow
flicker to occur, will not be required.
Should the impact of shadow flicker be identified, and the mitigation
measures proposed above prove ineffective, further analysis can be carried out
to identify the exact timings and conditions under which shadow flicker
occurs, and a technical solution sought. This is likely to involve pre-
programming the turbine with dates and times when shadow flicker would
cause a nuisance for nearby receptors. A photosensitive cell can be used to
monitor sunlight, and the turbine could potentially then be shut down, when
the strength of the sun, wind speed and the angle and position of the sun
combines to cause a flicker nuisance. As a means of best practice, it would be
recommended to shift WTGs to atleast beyond 350 m from the village to
minimise the impacts of shadow flicker.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
237
Assessment of Residual Impacts
The results of the WindPro shadow flicker assessment show a real case
estimate with certain assumptions and the mitigation measures above will be
implemented for the identified properties that experiences shadow flicker.
Residual impacts following the application of required mitigation measures, as
discussed above, is likely to result in to negligible impacts.
Table 7.52 Impact Significance of Shadow flickering on sensitive receptors
Impact Shadow Flickering during the Operation Phase
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Within 500 m of WTGs, particularly BLG-014 and BLG-080.
Frequency During sunny days
Likelyhood Likely
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Shadow flicker impact as a result of WTGs BLG-014 and BLG-080 on
receptors with shadow flicker values of 83:42 and 44:05 shadow
hours per year
Impact Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Considering the overall impact magnitude and vulnerability of
social receptors, the impact significance is assessed minor.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource Sensitivity Low Medium High
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is envisaged to be negligible.
Impacts to communities due to accidents including natural disasters and
blade throw incidents
Source of Impact
A failure of the rotor blade can result in the ‘throwing’ of a rotor blade, which
may affect public safety. The overall risk of blade throw is extremely low.
Further, there are chances of malfunction or destructions due to natural
disasters such as storms, cyclones, earthquakes and lightning.
Any communities lying in close proximity to the WTG are receptors of this
type of impact. Blade throw risk for public safety is treated as extremely low
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
238
as in the event of failure the blade can reach between 15-100 m from the wind
turbine.
The project area is not prone to storms and cyclones and does not fall in an
active earthquake prone zone. The Project area falls in Zone II according to
the Seismic Hazard Map of India. Zone II is defined as a zone having low
damage risk zone and vulnerable to earthquakes of intensity MSK VII (as
defined by Building Materials and Technology Promotion Council).
The area witnesses intense lightening during showers and it is possible that a
lightning strike could damage various components notwithstanding the
lightning protection deployed in the machine. The lightning may cause fire on
the WTG and may also spread to any nearby human habitation or vegetation
Micro-siting guidelines take into account safety setback distance. The WTG
design and micro-siting guidelines1 reduces the likelihood of safety risks to
public to a great extent. Reportedly, the WTGs have embedded lighting
protection. The rotor blades are equipped with a lightning receptors mounted
in the blade. The turbine is grounded and shielded to protect against
lightning, however, lightning is an unpredictable force of nature, and it is
possible that a lightning strike could damage various components
notwithstanding the lightning protection deployed in the machine.
WTGs will shut down at pre-set wind cut off limits to prevent chances of
blade throw.
Significance of Impact
Based on the above the impact significance after implementing the embedded
controls is assessed to be negligible.
Additional Mitigation/Management Measures
Although the embedded controls are sufficient to address the effects of
accidental impacts, we suggest following measures to be included in the
ESMS:
The disaster management cell of the district and the nearest fire-service
station should be involved in preparedness for emergency situation;
Company should ensure it has adequate third party insurance cover to
meet the financial loss to any third party due to such emergencies.
1 As per micrositing Guidelines by NIWE, the developer shall leave a distance of 2x D perpendicular to the predominant
wind direction and 3 XD distance in the pre-dominant wind direction. This hould be applied for flat and complex terrain.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
239
Table 7.53 Significance of impacts of accidents to communities as a result of natural
disasters and blade throw incidents
Impact Accidents and natural disasters including natural disasters and blade
throw incidents
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact Scale Within 100 m of the WTGs. There are no communities in close
proximity to any of the WTGs.
Frequency Operation phase.
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Receptor Sensitivity Low Medium High
Impact Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered minor.
Significance of Residual Impacts
Residual Impact
Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Residual Impact
Significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered negligible.
Significance of Residual Impact
The Residual Impact Significance has been determined to be negligible.
7.7.2 Economic Loss/Displacement due to selling of land
Source of Impact
On an average 3-5 acres of land is being purchased for each WTG and there
are 48 WTGs in the project area. Besides this, 28 acres of land for pooling sub-
station have also been purchased by land aggregator and transferred in the
name of Suzlon.
Land use classification of the study area villages as presented in social
baseline section shows that more than 90% of total land area of each village is
either unirrigated land or culturable waste land. Most of the private farmlands
falling in the project area has been officially listed as single crop, non-
irrigated land with low productivity. Moreover the income received from
cultivation is insufficient to meet their family needs. Hence, most of the
cultivators in the area also have alternate source of income. In order to have
additional income people are even migrating to urban areas for labor work.
Moreover land of the proposed project is sold on the basis of buyer and seller
negotiations and the offer price is reportedly more than the prevailing circle
rate. Hence, economic loss from the sale of land is foreseen to have negligible
magnitude of impact.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
240
The proceeds of the land sale has provided financial resources to people for
investment in non-agricultural pursuits in order to diversify their livelihood
options or to invest in better education and future for their kids by migrating
to adjacent towns and cities. The land purchase process has escalated the land
price and the community would gain more benefits in future land
transactions.
Although major portion of land in study area is unirrigated land but still it
serves for cultivating two key cash crops of the region i.e. Ground nut and
Bengal gram.
Though the area is plagued by low farm productivity and agricultural
indebtedness, and the farmers are keen to sell their farm lands at market price,
on an average 63% of the main workers in the study area are still agricultural
labourers. Moreover, the study area has multiple wind farm projects in
operation and the area has witnessed a significant land sale for wind farm
projects in the area. This could lead to a cumulative impact on loss of
economic livelihood for the local agricultural laborers.
From the consultations, it has also been observed that most of the agricultural
laborers are from the marginalized segments of the society. So, they are highly
vulnerable to any small changes in the local employment opportunities.
Embedded provision
Suzlon undertakes CSR activities in the project area and as a part of that
focuses on increasing micro-enterprise initiatives and provides skill training
for women.
Significance of Impact
Based on the above the impact after implementing the embedded controls is
assessed to be moderate.
Mitigation Measures
Considering the limited non-farm employment opportunity in project area,
CSR activities would contribute towards skilling the locals for alternate
income opportunities.
Vocational Skill Development of Women;
Micro-enterprise solutions appropriate for the geographical area;
Water shed management and revival of traditional rainwater harvesting
measures for improving land for agriculture; and
Revival of millets and other traditional food grains and promotion of
organic agricultural practices. This would reduce the water stress for
irrigation as well as reduce the input costs for farming.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
241
Significance of Residual Impact
Based on the above the impact after implementing the embedded controls is
assessed to be minor.
Table.7.54 Significance of impact due to economic loss due to selling of land
Impact Economic loss due to selling of land
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent Local Regional International
Impact is likely to affect the project foot print area villages.
Impact Scale
Number of land owners actually being impacted by the project is quite
small as compared to combined size of population of the villages where
land parcel has been purchase or planned to be purchased.
Frequency Pre-Construction Phase
Likelihood Likely
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Resource/Receptors
Sensitivity
Low Medium High
Local population has limited non-farm employment opportunity and reduced land for agriculture may adversely affect the local agricultural labourers. However, poverty and illiteracy of population makes the social situation quite sensitive.
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered moderate.
Significance of Residual Impact
Residual Impact Magnitude
Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Residual Impact significance
Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Residual Impact Significance is minor.
7.7.3 Impact on local employment opportunity
Source of Impact
It is evident from the social baseline conditions of the study area that major
working population of the entire study area villages is agriculture labour,
working on other’s field for a sum negotiated with cultivator/owner of the
field. Non-agriculture workers are limited to about 10% in study area villages.
The existing scenario of the agriculture in the study area also indicates that it
is not actually sound enough to meet requirements of the people who are
dependent upon this sector. In absence of any industrial activity in the study
area, people have to resort to distress migration. There have been also cases of
women being forced into prostitution because of lack of alternate income
source.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
242
During operation phase of the project, employment opportunities won’t be
much for local people and it could be restricted to requirement of few security
personnel and few housekeeping staff at site office.
Table.7.55 Significance of employment opportunity
Impact Impact on local employment opportunities during project cycle
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent
Local Regional International
Locals would have short term employment opportunities during
construction phase of the project. However people from across the State
of Andhra Pradesh and other State, though in limited number are
likely be engaged in the project during project cycle in semi-skilled and
skilled category of manpower.
Frequency Construction Phase, operation and decommissioning phase of the
project
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Receptor sensitivity Low Medium High
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered Minor.
Enhancement Measures
Considering the limited non-farm employment opportunity in project area,
CSR activities would contribute towards skilling the locals for alternate
income opportunities.
Vocational Skill Development of Women;
Micro-enterprise solutions appropriate for the geographical area; and
Water shed management and revival of traditional rainwater harvesting measures for improving land for agriculture.
7.7.4 Social Development through Corporate Social responsibility (CSR) Initiatives
Context
As observed in the Social Baseline section, Anantpur is one of the backward
districts in the country and is plagued by an agricultural crisis. The area has
been declared drought prone and there are many instances of distress
migration.
Embedded Measures
Orange has a CSR policy and they are reportedly undertaking community
development activities in their other wind farm locations. No documents
pertaining to the same was made available and therefore, their proposed
activities could not be elaborated in this section.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
243
Table 7.56 Significance of Social Development Opportunities
Impact Impact on local employment opportunities during project cycle
Impact Nature Negative Positive Neutral
Impact Type Direct Indirect Induced
Impact Duration Temporary Short-term Long-term Permanent
Impact Extent
Local Regional International
Locals could be skilled to develop alternate income opportunities.
Agriculture could be revived by reintroducing traditional food grains
and strengthening existing water harvesting structures and ground
water recharge systems.
Frequency Operation phase of the project
Impact Magnitude Positive Negligible Small Medium Large
Receptor sensitivity Low Medium High
Impact Significance Negligible Minor Moderate Major
Significance of impact is considered major.
Enhancement Measures
Considering the limited non-farm employment opportunity in project area,
CSR activities would contribute towards skilling the locals for alternate
income opportunities.
Vocational Skill Development of Women;
Micro-enterprise solutions appropriate for the geographical area; and
Water shed management and revival of traditional rainwater harvesting
measures for improving land for agriculture.
Revival of millets and other traditional food grains and promotion of
organic agricultural practices. This would reduce the water stress for
irrigation as well as reduce the input costs for farming.
7.7.5 Cumulative environmental and social impacts
The study area in which the wind power project is spread across has other
wind power Suzlon accounting for greater than 200 MW of wind power being
generated in the area. In the absence of credible data on the footprint and
potential impacts as a result of wind farms that are operational in the area,
with the possibility of more projects coming up in the area, in the near future,
it is difficult to assess the cumulative impact on the region. However some of
the most likely impacts would be attributed to (i) air quality (ii) noise (iii)
shadow flicker impacts to villages in the vicinity of the WTGs (iv) traffic
hazards and (iv) economic loss for agricultural labourers have been envisaged.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
244
8 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
8.1 INTRODUCTION
This Section presents the Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP)
for OUWPPL Project in the district of Anantapur, in Andhra Pradesh. The
purpose of this ESMP is to specify the standards and controls required to
manage and monitor environmental and social impacts during different
phases of project life cycle, i.e. Construction, operation and decommissioning
phases. To achieve this, the ESMP identifies potential adverse impacts from
the planned activities and outlines mitigation measures required to reduce the
likely negative effects on the physical, natural and social environment. This is
in accordance to IFC Performance Standards 1 which emphasizes the
importance of managing social and environmental performance through the
lifecycle of the Project.
8.2 OUWPPL’S ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
To ensure the efficacy of environmental and social management plan, certain
institutional mechanisms with well-defined roles and responsibilities is
essential for effective implementation of identified mitigation measures
during construction, operation and maintenance phase and decommissioning
phases, respectively.
8.2.1 OUWPPL’s EHS Management
At the time of the site visit, the site engineer of OUWPPL was responsible for
overseeing the EHS aspects of the project and liaising with the EHS Manager
of Suzlon. It was understood that OUWPPL will be setting up a team at the
corporate level and the site level, with responsibilities are currently being held
by Orange. The EHS personnel of OUWPPL will have the ultimate
responsibility of implementing the provisions of the ESMP with the help of
the Suzlon. This role will include the ongoing management of environmental
and social impacts, monitoring of contractor performance as well as
developing mechanisms for dealing with environmental and social problems,
throughout the operation, maintenance phase and decommissioning phases,
respectively.
OUWPPL will also ensure that the activities of its contractors as well as
Suzlon’s contractors are conducted in accordance with good practice
measures, implementation of which will be required through contractual
documentation. The EHS aspects shall be the responsibility, of both, OUWPPL
and Suzlon.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
245
8.3 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
OUWPPL will play the primary role of supervisor to oversee the project
performance pertaining to environment, health, safety and social issues.An
outline for responsibilities of the proposed EHS department is given below:
8.3.1 Environmental, Health and Safety Department (EHS Department)
Environment, Health and Safety department shall be responsible for
monitoring of the implementation of the various actions which are to be
executed by the agencies specified in the ESMP.
In general, the EHS department shall perform the following activities:
Preparation of required documents on environmental and social
management;
Ensuring availability of resources and appropriate institutional
arrangements for implementation of ESMP;
Implementation of the health and safety measures;
Collection of the statistics of health of workers;
Providing support during routine medical check-ups of workers;
Awareness and implementing safety programmes;
Providing job specific induction training;
Compliance of regulatory requirements;
Carrying out environmental audits;
Identify unsafe acts and conditions and suggest remedies;
Develop safety culture and comply with company’s EHS policy and
standard requirements;
Encourage and enforce the use of PPE’s;
Educate all employees for the use of PPE’s and safe practices;
Direct, coordinate and orient the safety activities;
Promulgate the spread of policy, objectives, rules and/or regulations;
Perform a thorough investigation of all accidents and review the
recommendations to avoid any repetition;
Monitoring the progress of implementation of ESMP; and
Reviewing and updating the ESMP as and when required for its effective
implementation.
8.4 INSPECTION, MONITORING AND AUDIT
Inspection and monitoring of the environmental impacts of the Project
activities will increase the effectiveness of ESMP. Through the process of
inspection and auditing, OUWPPL must ensure that the conditions stipulated
in various permits are complied. The inspections and audits will be done by
the EPC contractor, trained team of OUWPPL’s EHS department subject to be
reviewed and conducted by external agencies/experts. The entire process of
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
246
inspections and audits should be documented. The inspection and audit
findings are to be implemented by the site in-charge in their respective areas.
8.5 REPORTING AND DOCUMENTATION
OUWPPL will develop and implement a programme of reporting through all
stages of the project cycle. Delegated personnel shall require to fully
complying with the reporting programme in terms of both timely submissions
of reports as per acceptable level of detail. Reporting will be done in form of
environmental check list, incident record register, environmental and social
performance reports (weekly, monthly, quarterly, half yearly, yearly etc.).
External Reporting and Communication
EHS head is responsible for ensuring that communication with regulatory
agencies and stakeholders are maintained as per the requirement. All
complaints and enquiries are to be appropriately dealt with and records
should be maintained in a Complaint/Enquiry Register by the delegated staff
of EHS.
Internal Reporting and Communication
Inspection and audits finding along with their improvement program are to
be regularly reported to the senior management for their consideration. The
same are also to be communicated with the staff working on the project.
To maintain an open communication between the staff and management on
EHS and social issues the followings are being used:
Team Briefings;
On-site work group meetings;
Work Specific Instructions; and
Meeting with stakeholders.
Documentation
Documentation is an important step in implementing ESMP. OUWPPL will
establish a documentation and record keeping system to ensure recording and
updating of documents per the requirements specified in ESMP. The
documents should be kept as hardcopies as well as in electronic format.
Responsibilities have to be assigned to relevant personnel for ensuring that the
ESMP documentation system is maintained and that document control is
ensured through access by and distribution to, identified personnel in form of
the following:
Master Environment Management System document;
Legal Register;
Operation control procedures;
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
247
Work instructions;
Incident reports;
Emergency preparedness and response procedures;
Training records;
Monitoring reports;
Auditing reports; and
Complaints register and issues attended/closed.
8.5.1 ESMP Review and Amendments
The ESMP act as an environment and social management tool which needs to
be reviewed periodically to address changes in the organisation, process or
regulatory requirements.
Following a review, the EHS head of OUWPPL will be responsible for making
the amendments in the ESMP.
The amended ESMP will be communicated to all the staff.
8.6 TRAINING PROGRAMME AND CAPACITY BUILDING
Training is needed for effective implementation of ESMP. The training
programme will ensure that all concerned members of the team understand
the following aspects:
Purpose of management plan for the project activities;
Requirements of the management plan and specific action plans;
Understanding the sensitive environmental and social features within and
surrounding the project areas; and
Aware of the potential risks from the Project activities.
The EHS head of OUWPPL will ensure that Environmental health and safety
induction training and job specific trainings are identified and given to the
concerned personnel for construction activities and operation of the wind
farm.
Also general environmental awareness will be increased among the project’s
team to encourage the implementation of environmentally sound practices
and compliance requirements of the project activities. This will help in
minimising adverse environmental impacts, compliance with the applicable
regulations and standards, and achieving performance beyond compliance.
The same level of awareness and commitment will be imparted to the
contractors and sub-contractors prior to the commencement of the project.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
248
8.6.1 Environmental and Social Management Plan
This section outlines the potential adverse impacts, mitigation measures,
monitoring and management responsibilities during construction operation
and decommissioning phases of the Project.
The purpose of ESMP is to:
Provide an institutional mechanism with well-defined roles and
responsibilities for ensuring that measures identified in ESIA designated
to mitigation potentially adverse impacts are implemented;
List all suggested mitigation measures and control technologies,
safeguards identified through the ESIA process;
Provide Project monitoring program for effective implementation of the
mitigation measures and ascertain efficacy of the environmental
management and risk control systems in place; and
Assist in ensuring compliance with all relevant legislations at local, state
and national level for the Project.
In order to minimize adverse impacts during the different phases of the
project lifecycle, mitigation measures, monitoring plan and responsibilities for
its implementation are given in Table 8.1. The responsibility for
implementation of ESMP will primarily lie with the EHS department of
Suzlon under the supervision with the EHS department of OUWPPL.
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
249
Table 8.1 Environmental and social management and monitoring plan for OUWPPL’s wind Power Project
S. N. Environmental/ Social
Resource
Aspect, Potential
impact/issue
Mitigation Measure Responsibility
for ensuring
mitigation
implementatio
n
Means of verification
that mitigation has
been met
Timing and
frequency of
monitoring
Responsibility for
implementation of
monitoring
Supervision
responsibility
Reporting
requirements
Phases
Co
nst
ruct
ion
Op
era
tio
n
De
com
mis
sio
nin
g
1 Environment
(i) Land Use, Soil and
Land Capability
Change in land use EPC contractor should ensure
that unnecessary disturbance of
surrounding features are
avoided.
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Vegetation should be cleared
only in locations where WTGs,
ancillary facilities, transmission
lines and access/internal roads
are planned, to minimize the
impact on the surrounding
ecosystem.
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
After construction, labour
camp, batching plant and stock
yard areas should be restored to
pre-construction state.
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Soil erosion Stripping of top soil should be
done just prior to excavation.
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Topography should be restored
to extent possible.
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Stock piles and disturbed areas
should be kept moist to avoid
wind erosion.
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Simultaneous revegetation to
stabilize soil.
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Loss of Fertile Soil Removed topsoil to be stored
separately, protected and
reused for landscaping within
the Project area
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Soil Compaction Heavy vehicles should
designate select routes
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Heavily compacted areas
should be ploughed
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Heavy machinery should
designate select routes to
minimize soil compaction
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
250
S. N. Environmental/ Social
Resource
Aspect, Potential
impact/issue
Mitigation Measure Responsibility
for ensuring
mitigation
implementatio
n
Means of verification
that mitigation has
been met
Timing and
frequency of
monitoring
Responsibility for
implementation of
monitoring
Supervision
responsibility
Reporting
requirements
Phases
Co
nst
ruct
ion
Op
era
tio
n
De
com
mis
sio
nin
g
Waste Generation Random disposal of waste
should not be allowed
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
No unauthorized dumping of
used oil and hazardous waste
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Ensure daily collection and
periodic (weekly) disposal of
construction waste
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Hazardous waste should be
appropriately labelled, stored
onsite and reused or disposed
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Municipal solid waste from
labour camps should be
segregated onsite
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Dismantled waste should not be
left over in the whole Project
area and should be collected
and stored at designated areas
for further segregation and
disposal
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Once EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Hazardous waste should be
stored in labelled drums with
impervious surfaces at
designated points onsite and
disposed through an
appropriate vendor
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Once EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Soil Contamination Sewage should be disposed
through soak pits or septic
tanks
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Regular maintenance of
transport vehicles should be
carried out
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Unloading and loading
protocols should be prepared
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Guidelines should be prepared
for immediate clean-up of
spillages
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
251
S. N. Environmental/ Social
Resource
Aspect, Potential
impact/issue
Mitigation Measure Responsibility
for ensuring
mitigation
implementatio
n
Means of verification
that mitigation has
been met
Timing and
frequency of
monitoring
Responsibility for
implementation of
monitoring
Supervision
responsibility
Reporting
requirements
Phases
Co
nst
ruct
ion
Op
era
tio
n
De
com
mis
sio
nin
g
Oil/lubricants should be stored
on impervious floors in the
storage area having secondary
containment
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Guidelines and procedures
should be prepared and
followed for immediate clean-
up actions following any
spillages
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Oil/lubricants should be stored
on impervious floors in the
storage area having secondary
containment
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Guidelines and procedures
should be prepared and
followed for immediate clean-
up actions following spillages
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Unloading and loading
protocols should be prepared
for diesel, oil and used oil
respectively and workers
should be trained to prevent
spills and leaks
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
(ii) Water Resources and
Quality
Water Resources
availability
Construction labour should be
educated about water
conservation
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Quantification of water
consumed and record
keeping
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Optimum use of water during
sprinkling of roads for dust
settlement, vehicle washing and
concrete mixing.
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Quantification of water
consumed and record
keeping
Continuous
Monitoring
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Regular inspection to prevent
water leakages
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection Continuous
Monitoring
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Optimum use of water during
domestic use, dust settlement
and washing of vehicles
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection Continuous
Monitoring
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Water Quality Proper covering and stacking of
loose construction material to
prevent surface run-off
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Monthly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Provision of septic tanks and
soak pits
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection Monthly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Toilets, soak pits, septic tanks
and waste collection to be built
away from natural drainage
channels
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Monthly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
252
S. N. Environmental/ Social
Resource
Aspect, Potential
impact/issue
Mitigation Measure Responsibility
for ensuring
mitigation
implementatio
n
Means of verification
that mitigation has
been met
Timing and
frequency of
monitoring
Responsibility for
implementation of
monitoring
Supervision
responsibility
Reporting
requirements
Phases
Co
nst
ruct
ion
Op
era
tio
n
De
com
mis
sio
nin
g
Provision of well-connected
storm water drains
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Continuous
Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Licensed contractors for
management and disposal of
waste sludge
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection Continuous
Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Good housekeeping in the
storage yard to avoid spillage
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection and
Surprise Visits
Continuous
Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Adoption of spill/leakage
clearance plan for immediate
clearing of spills/leaks
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection Continuous
Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Labourers should be given
training towards proactive use
of designated areas for waste
disposal and use of toilets
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection Continuous
Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Spills/Leakage clearance plan
to be adopted for immediate
clearing of spills and leakages
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection Continuous
Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
(iii) Ambient Noise Increased noise levels
during construction
activities
Limit number of heavy vehicles
to only those that are necessary
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Avoid villages and
communities while determining
project access roads
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Limit engine breaking and horn
usage of vehicles
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Construction work to be carried
out during daytime hours (6:00
am to 10:00 pm)
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Vehicles and equipment should
be well maintained
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection;
Record Keeping
Training records;
Visual Assessment
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Regular maintenance of WTGs OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection Continuous
Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
253
S. N. Environmental/ Social
Resource
Aspect, Potential
impact/issue
Mitigation Measure Responsibility
for ensuring
mitigation
implementatio
n
Means of verification
that mitigation has
been met
Timing and
frequency of
monitoring
Responsibility for
implementation of
monitoring
Supervision
responsibility
Reporting
requirements
Phases
Co
nst
ruct
ion
Op
era
tio
n
De
com
mis
sio
nin
g
Periodic monitoring of noise
near the sources of generation
to ensure compliance with
design specification
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection Continuous
Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Creation of noise barriers
between receptors and WTGs
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection Continuous
Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
(iv) Visual Landscape Visual Landscape/ visual
aesthetic impacts
Ancillary structures presence
and area should be minimized
to the extent necessary
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection and
Surprise Visits
Continuous
Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Construction areas should be
restored to original form
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection and
Surprise Visits
Continuous
Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Signage related to wind farms
should be discrete and confined
to entrance gates
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Monthly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
No other corporate or
advertising signage should be
displayed on site
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Monthly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
The footprint of operations and
maintenance facilities as well as
parking and vehicular
circulation should be clearly
defined and not allowed to spill
over into other areas of the site
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Monthly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
Use of certain colours reduces
the visual contrast between
turbine structures and
background
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Site Inspection Monthly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
(v) Shadow Flicker Use of high fencing at problem
locations
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Site Inspection Continuous
Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
2 Social
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
254
S. N. Environmental/ Social
Resource
Aspect, Potential
impact/issue
Mitigation Measure Responsibility
for ensuring
mitigation
implementatio
n
Means of verification
that mitigation has
been met
Timing and
frequency of
monitoring
Responsibility for
implementation of
monitoring
Supervision
responsibility
Reporting
requirements
Phases
Co
nst
ruct
ion
Op
era
tio
n
De
com
mis
sio
nin
g
(i) Traffic Hazards Potential vehicular
accidents
The traffic movement for the
project in the area will be
regulated to ensure road and
pedestrian (including livestock)
safety
Put in place a grievance
mechanism to allow for
community members to report
any concern or grievance
related to project activities
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Discussion with EHS
Managers of both,
OUWPPL and Suzlon,
Visual inspection
Monthly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
(ii) Blade Throw and
Natural Disasters
Public Safety The disaster management cell of
the district and the nearest fire-
service station should be
involved in preparedness for
emergency situation;
Company should ensure it has
adequate third party insurance
cover to meet the financial loss
to any third party due to such
emergencies.
Put in place an Adequate
Grievance redressal mechanism
to capture community concerns
O & M Team
Suzlon
Visual Inspection and
Record Keeping
Monthly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EHS
Manager (Suzlon)
to OUWPPL site
EHS Manager
(iii) Vulnerable
communities
Decrease in agricultural
labour work due to land
sale
Undertake a profiling of the
various social groups in the
study area, to understand the
individual needs and concerns
of the social groups and identify
community development and
CSR programmes in accordance
to the same
Orange CSR Study report/CSR
report
Weekly Monitoring CSR team CSR –Orange CSR Report for the
Project Area
3. Ecology
(i) Vegetation Vegetation Clearance Vegetation disturbance and
clearance should be restricted to
the project study area
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Areas with vegetation patches
around water source should be
avoided during planning of
ancillary components
EHS Manager
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Internal discussion
with EHS team and
reported in
quarterly report
Top soil that is disturbed
should be stored separately for
restoration of the habitat
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Unnecessary disturbance of
neighbouring vegetation should
be strictly prohibited
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection and
Surprise Visits
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
255
S. N. Environmental/ Social
Resource
Aspect, Potential
impact/issue
Mitigation Measure Responsibility
for ensuring
mitigation
implementatio
n
Means of verification
that mitigation has
been met
Timing and
frequency of
monitoring
Responsibility for
implementation of
monitoring
Supervision
responsibility
Reporting
requirements
Phases
Co
nst
ruct
ion
Op
era
tio
n
De
com
mis
sio
nin
g
Simultaneous revegetation on
outskirts of project activity
should be practiced for areas
that are determined to have
loose or unstable soil
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection and
Surprise Visits
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Local grass species should be
seeded in disturbed areas
during monsoon
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
After Construction Upon Completion of
Task
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
(ii) Construction Activities Excavation, anthropogenic
movement, noise and
sedimentation
Construction and transportation
activities should be avoided at
night and in peak areas during
dawn and dusk
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection and
Surprise Visits
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Project should be conducted in
a phased manner with
construction activities limited to
one cluster of WTGs at one time
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Areas with pre-existing
burrows and ground roosting
sites for birds should be
avoided when possible
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Hazardous materials should not
be stored near natural drainage
channels
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Efforts should be made to
minimize construction noise
and the use of noise barriers
should be considered for high
noise levels.
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection and
Record Keeping
Weekly Reports and
When noise barriers
are utilized
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL
Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Waste materials should be
cleared in a timely manner and
the use of artificial lights should
be minimized so as to not
attract wildlife
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection and
Surprise Visits
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Labour movement should be
restricted between construction
camps and construction sites
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Vehicle movement should be
restricted to only when
necessary in areas where
wildlife is active
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection and
Surprise Visits
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Anti-poaching and hunting
policy should be strictly
enforced
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
General awareness regarding
fauna should be enhanced
through trainings, posters, etc.
among the staff and labourers
OUWPPL and
Suzlon Site
Management
Record Keeping Monthly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Internal discussion
with EHS team and
reported in
quarterly report
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
256
S. N. Environmental/ Social
Resource
Aspect, Potential
impact/issue
Mitigation Measure Responsibility
for ensuring
mitigation
implementatio
n
Means of verification
that mitigation has
been met
Timing and
frequency of
monitoring
Responsibility for
implementation of
monitoring
Supervision
responsibility
Reporting
requirements
Phases
Co
nst
ruct
ion
Op
era
tio
n
De
com
mis
sio
nin
g
(ii) Laying of approach
roads
Construction, widening
and upgrade of access and
internal roads
Access road construction
should be carried out in a
phased manner with
construction activities limited to
one cluster of WTGs at one time
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Construction and transportation
activities should be avoided at
night and in peak areas during
dawn and dusk
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection and
Surprise Visits
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Number of routes should be
minimized for construction and
transportation
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Speed limit of vehicles plying
on these routes should be kept
to 10-15 km/hr to avoid road
kill
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection and
Surprise Visits
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
If access roads are created
across key crossing points for
herpetofauna and smaller
mammals, then culverts or
alternate paths should be
provided to avoid road kills.
EHS Manager Visual Inspection When Required EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Internal discussion
with EHS team and
reported in
quarterly report
When grasses or small scrubs
are removed for access road
construction (or any other
construction), replanting should
be implemented after the
construction phase to allow
roosting mammals and birds to
utilize these resources in the
next breeding season
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Upon Completion of
Task
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
(iii) Hazards from
operational wind
turbine blades
Bird collisions, visual
impairment, noise and low
pressure areas
Flash lamps on the WTGs will
prevent bird collision at nights
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Before
Commissioning of
Wind Farm
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
During operation and
maintenance activities, all bird
carcasses found in the wind
farm should be recorded and
photographed with details
about the distance from the
closest wind turbine generator
and the name of the wind
turbine generator
O & M Team
Suzlon
Visual Inspection and
Record Keeping
Monthly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Weekly bird mortality counts
should be undertaken for the
first two years of the wind farm
operation to determine if there
is any risk of bird collision from
the wind farm
O & M Team
Suzlon
Visual Inspection and
Record Keeping
Monthly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
257
S. N. Environmental/ Social
Resource
Aspect, Potential
impact/issue
Mitigation Measure Responsibility
for ensuring
mitigation
implementatio
n
Means of verification
that mitigation has
been met
Timing and
frequency of
monitoring
Responsibility for
implementation of
monitoring
Supervision
responsibility
Reporting
requirements
Phases
Co
nst
ruct
ion
Op
era
tio
n
De
com
mis
sio
nin
g
Collection of baseline data on
migratory birds visiting the
study area in the migratory
season by using vantage point
methodology and wetland
surveys
O & M Team
Suzlon and
External
consultants
Survey Report Once during
migration season
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Waste materials should not be
left lying around and if any
waste is found then it should be
cleared immediately so as to not
attract birds near the WTG
blades
O & M Team
Suzlon
Visual Inspection and
Surprise Visits
Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Wind turbine generators should
be properly maintained to
ensure that turbine blade
speeds are regulated and blade
throws are avoided
O & M Team
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Monthly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Herb layers to be restored in
the vicinity of the site to prevent
raptors flying in close vicinity
of wind farm to prey on rodents
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Before
Commissioning of
Wind Farm
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Check should be imposed so
that dead carcass is not
disposed near the WTG areas so
that the vultures are not
attracted
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Weekly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
(iv) Hazards from
transmission
infrastructure
Birds roosting or nesting
on transmission towers
and lines
Bird safe strain poles with
insulating chains of at least 60
cm in length should be adopted
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Before
Commissioning of
Wind Farm
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Regular checking of vacuums or
holes in the towers during
breeding season should be
conducted
O & M Team
Suzlon Visual Inspection Monthly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Transmission poles should be
raised with suspended
insulators to the extent possible
O & M Team
Suzlon Visual Inspection Monthly Monitoring EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Overhead cables should be
marked using diffractors and
avoid the use of areas of high
bird concentrations
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection Before
Commissioning of
Wind Farm
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Collection of baseline data on
migratory birds visiting the
study area in the migratory
season by using vantage point
methodology and wetland
surveys
O & M Team
Suzlon and
External
consultants
Survey Report Once during
migration season
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
4. Occupational Health
and Safety
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
258
S. N. Environmental/ Social
Resource
Aspect, Potential
impact/issue
Mitigation Measure Responsibility
for ensuring
mitigation
implementatio
n
Means of verification
that mitigation has
been met
Timing and
frequency of
monitoring
Responsibility for
implementation of
monitoring
Supervision
responsibility
Reporting
requirements
Phases
Co
nst
ruct
ion
Op
era
tio
n
De
com
mis
sio
nin
g
Obtain and check safety method
statements from contractors
before allowing them to work
on site
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection,
Record keeping and
surprise visits
Before
Commissioning of
Wind Farm
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Allow only authorized people
on site
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection,
Record keeping and
surprise visits
Before
Commissioning of
Wind Farm
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Implement a disaster
management plan to account
for natural disasters, fires,
accidents and emergency
situations
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection,
Record keeping and
surprise visits
Before
Commissioning of
Wind Farm
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Display health and safety
notifications at appropriate and
easily visible places
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection,
Record keeping and
surprise visits
Before
Commissioning of
Wind Farm
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
Monitor health and safety
performance through an
operating audit system
EPC Contractor
engaged by
Suzlon
Visual Inspection,
Record keeping and
surprise visits
Before
Commissioning of
Wind Farm
EHS Manager Suzlon EHS Team
OUWPPL Report from EPC to
EHS Manager
Suzlon/ OUWPPL
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
259
9 IMPACT SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
9.1 INTRODUCTION
This Environmental and Social impact assessment has been conducted to
evaluate the impacts associated with the wind farm project 100.8 MW wind
farm project located near the village of Beluguppa in the district of Anantapur
in Andhra Pradesh. The impact assessment has been conducted in compliance
with the Administrative Framework identified herein, including relevant
national legislative requirements, international conventions etc.
9.2 IMPACTS REQUIRING DETAILED ASSESSMENT
Following a Scoping exercise, this ESIA was focused on interactions between
the Project activities and various resources/receptors that could result in
significant impacts. The table below (Table 9.1) presents the outcomes of the
comprehensive assessment of identified impacts as a result of the various
phases of the Project.
Table 9.1 Impact Assessment Summary
Impact Description Impact
nature
Significance of Impact Residual Impact
Construction Phase
Change in Land use Negative Moderate Moderate
Soil Erosion Negative Minor Negligible
Soil Compaction Negative Minor Negligible
Improper Waste disposal Negative Minor Negligible
Leaks and spills Negative Minor Negligible
Ecological impacts due to
Vegetation Clearance Negative Moderate Not Significant
Ecological impacts due to
construction activities Negative Moderate Moderate
Ecological impacts due to laying of
approach roads Negative Moderate Not Significant
Water Availability Negative Minor Minor
Water Quality Negative Negligible Negligible Ambient Air Quality Negative Minor Negligible
Aesthetics and Landscape concerns Negative Minor Negligible
Noise Levels Negative Moderate Minor
Occupational Health and Safety Negative Moderate Minor
Operation and Maintenance Phase
Leaks and spills Negative Negligible Negligible Water Availability Negative Negligible Negligible Occupational Health and Safety Negative Minor Minor
Noise Levels-Daytime Negative Minor Negligible
Noise Levels-Night Time Negative Moderate Minor
Shadow Flicker Negative Minor Negligible
Impacts from traffic hazards Negative Moderate Minor
ERM OUWPPL: ESIA FOR 100.8 MW WIND POWER PROJECT, BELUGUPPA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT, A.P PROJECT # I11419/0330571 AUGUST 2016
260
9.3 CONCLUSION
The project is a green energy project comprising of 48 WTGs to generate
approximately 100.8 MW power through wind energy. The Project and its key
components such as access road, site office building, and external
transmission lines, are likely to have potential environmental impacts on
baseline parameters such as land use, ambient air quality, noise quality etc. in
the immediate vicinity of WTGs. The social impacts from the project are
assessed to be generally beneficial in terms of local employment and overall
local area development.
The Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) describes mitigation
measures for impacts specific to project activities and also discuss
implementation mechanism. Project specific management plans are also
provided for certain project activities such as waste management, bird/ bat
management, stakeholder consultation etc.
To conclude, the implementation of ESMP/ Management plans will help
OUWPPL in complying with its internal requirements as well as national/
state regulatory framework in addition to meeting the requirements of it’s
lenders.
Impacts from Blade Throws and
Natural Disasters Negative Minor Negligible
Impact on Local Agricultural
Laborers Negative Moderate Minor
Impact on local employment
opportunity Positive
Impact on Social Development Positive
Collision and mortality risk to
avifauna and bats from operating
wind turbine blades
Negative Moderate Moderate
Collision and electrical hazards
from transmission infrastructure Negative Moderate Moderate
Aesthetics and Landscape concerns Negative Minor Negligible
Decommissioning Phase
Land and Soil Environment Negative Minor Minor to negligible
Ambient Air Quality Negative Minor Minor
Occupational Health and Safety Negative Moderate Minor
Annex A
Photo-documentation
BLG 123
BLG 124
BLG 125
BLG 077
BLG 078
BLG 075
BLG 025
BLG 017
BLG 018
BLG 007
BLG 016
BLG 015
BLG 028
BLG 085
BLG 084
BLG 082
BLG 157
BLG 156
BLG 154
BLG 027
BLG 026
Annex B
Policies of Orange
Annex C
Applicable Environmental
Standards
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
C1
1.1.1 Ambient Air Quality Standards
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQ Standards), as prescribed by
MoEFCC vide, Gazette Notification dated 16th November, 2009 are given below in
Table.1.
Table.1 National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Pollutant Time Weighted
Avg.
Concentration in Ambient Air
Industrial, Residential,
Rural & Other Areas
Ecologically Sensitive
Areas (notified by
Central Government)
Sulphur dioxide (SO2)
g/m3
Annual Average* 50 20
24 Hours** 80 80
Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx)
g/m3
Annual Average* 40 30
24 Hours** 80 80
Particulate Matter (PM 10)
g/m3
Annual Average* 60 60
24 Hours** 100 100
Particulate Matter (PM 2.5)
g/m3
Annual Average* 40 40
24 Hours** 60 60
Ozone (O3)
g/m3
8 Hours** 100 100
1 Hour** 180 180
Lead (Pb)
g/m3
Annual Average* 0.50 0.50
24 Hours** 1.0 1.0
Carbon monoxide (CO)
mg/m3
8 Hours** 02 02
1 Hour** 04 04
Ammonia (NH3)
g/m3
Annual* 100 100
24 Hours** 400 400
Benzene (C6H6)
g/m3
Annual* 05 05
-
particulate phase ng/m3
Annual* 01 01
Arsenic (As)
ng/m3
Annual* 06 06
Nickel (Ni)
ng/m3
Annual* 20 20
Note: *Annual arithmetic mean of minimum 104 measurements in a year at a particular site taken twice a
week 24 hourly at uniform interval.
** 24 hourly/8 hourly/1 hourly monitored values, as applicable shall be complied with 98% of the time in a
year. 2% of the time, it may exceed but not on two consecutive days of monitoring.
As the project is in rural/residential set up, NAAQS for rural/residential area
will be applicable for the project.
IFC/WB Air Emissions and Ambient Air Quality Standards
The IFC/WB General EHS guidelines on Air emissions and ambient air
quality, specifies that emissions do not result in pollutant concentrations that
reach or exceed relevant ambient quality guidelines and standards by
applying national legislated standards, or in their absence World Health
Organization (WHO) Ambient Air Quality guidelines as represented in Table
2
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
C2
Table.2 WHO Ambient Air Quality Guidelines
Pollutant Averaging Period Guideline Value in g/m3
Sulphur Dioxide 24-hour 24-hour
10 minute 10 minute
125 (Interim target-1)
50 (Interim target-2)
Nitrogen Oxide 1 year 40 (guideline)
1 hour 200 (guideline)
Particulate Matter 10 1 year 70 (Interim target-1)
50 (Interim target-2)
30 (Interim target-3)
20 (guideline)
24 hour 150 (Interim target-1)
100 (Interim target-2)
75 (Interim target-3)
50 (guideline)
Particulate Matter 2.5 1 year 35 (Interim target-1)
25 (Interim target-2)
15 (Interim target-3)
10 (guideline)
24 hour 75 (Interim target-1)
50 (Interim target-2)
37.5 (Interim target-3)
25 (guideline)
Ozone 8-hour daily 8-hour daily
Maximum Maximum
Source: IFC/WB General EHS Guidelines: Air emissions and ambient air quality, 30 April 2007
Interim target means Interim targets are provided in recognition of the need for a staged approach to
achieving the recommended guidelines.
1.1.2 Water Quality Standards
As per the Bureau of Indian Standards, (IS 10500: 2012) drinking water shall
comply with the requirements given in Table 3.
Table.3 Indian Drinking Water Standard (IS 10500: 2012)
S.N Substance/ Characteristics Requirement
(Acceptable limit)
Permissible limit in
absence of alternate
source
1. Colour, Hazen units, max 5 15
2. Odour Unobjectionable -
3. Taste Agreeable -
4. Turbidity, NTU, max 5 5
5. pH value 6.5 - 8.5 No Relaxation
6. Total hardness (as CaCO3) mg/l, max 200 600
7. Iron (as Fe) mg/l, max 0.3 No relaxation
8. Chlorides (as Cl) mg/l, max 250 1000
9. Free residual chlorine, mg/l, min 0.2 1
10. Dissolved solids mg/l, max 500 2000
11. Calcium (as Ca) mg/l, max 75 200
12. Magnesium (as Mg) mg/l, max 30 100
13. Copper (as Cu) mg/l, max 0.05 1.5
14. Manganese (as Mn) mg/l, max 0.1 0.3
15. Sulphate (as SO4) mg/l, max 200 400
16. Nitrate (as NO3) mg/l, max 45 No relaxation
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
C3
S.N Substance/ Characteristics Requirement
(Acceptable limit)
Permissible limit in
absence of alternate
source
17. Fluoride (as F) mg/l, max 1.0 1.5
18. Phenolic compounds (as C6H6OH)
mg/l, max 0.001 0.002
19. Mercury (as Hg) mg/l, max 0.001 No relaxation
20. Cadmium (as Cd) mg/l, max 0.003 No relaxation
21. Selenium (as Se) mg/l, max 0.01 No relaxation
22. Arsenic (as As) mg/l, max 0.01 0.05
23. Cyanide (as CN) mg/l, max 0.05 No relaxation
24. Lead (as Pb) mg/l, max 0.01 No relaxation
25. Zinc (as Zn) mg/l, max 5 15
26. Anionic detergents (as MBAS) mg/l,
max 0.2 1.0
27. Total Chromium (as Cr) mg/l, max 0.05 No relaxation
28. Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (as
PAH) g/l, max 0.0001 No relaxation
29. Mineral Oil mg/l, max 0.5 No relaxation
30. Pesticides mg/l, max Absent 0.001
31.
Radioactive materials:
a) Alpha emitters Bq/l, max
b) Beta emitters pci/l, max
0.1 1.0
No relaxation No relaxation
32. Total Alkalinity (as CaCO3), mg/l, max 200 600
33. Aluminium (as Al) mg/l, max 0.03 0.2
34. Boron, mg/l, max 0.5 1.0
35. Ammonia (as total ammonia-N). mg/l,
max 0.5 No relaxation
36. Barium (as Ba), mg/l, max 0.7 No relaxation
37. Chloramines (as Cl2), mg/l, max 4.0 No relaxation
38. Silver (as Ag), mg/l, max 0.1 No relaxation
39. Sulphide (as H2S), mg/l, max 0.05 No relaxation
40. Molybdenum (as Mo), mg/l, max 0.07 No relaxation
41. Nickel (as Ni), mg/l, max 0.02 No relaxation
42. Polychlorinated biphenyls, mg/l, max 0.0005 No relaxation
43.
Trilomethanes:
a) Bromoform, mg/l, max
b) Dibromochloromethane, mg/l, max
c) Bromodichloromethane, mg/l, max
d) Chloroform, mg/l, max
0.1 0.1 0.06 0.2
No relaxation No relaxation No relaxation No relaxation
Bacteriological Quality
1.
All water intended for drinking:
a) E. coli or thermotolerant coliform
bacteria
Shall not be detectable in any 100 ml sample
-
2.
Treated water entering the distribution
system:
a) E. coli or thermotolerant coliform
bacteria
b) Total coliform bacteria
Shall not be detectable in any 100 ml sample; Shall not be detectable in any 100 ml sample.
-
3.
Treated water in the distribution system:
a) E. coli or thermotolerant coliform
bacteria
b) Total coliform bacteria
Shall not be detectable in any 100 ml sample; Shall not be detectable in any 100 ml sample.
-
Source: Central Pollution Control Board
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
C4
General Standards for discharge
The general standards for discharge are as prescribed under the Environment
Protection Rules, 1986 and amendments. The project intends to treat the
domestic waste water in septic tanks and soak pits. The general standards for
discharge of environmental pollutants are detailed in Table 4.
Table.4 General Standards for Discharge of Environmental Pollutants
S.
N
Parameter Standards
Inland surface
water
Public sewers Land for
Irrigation
1. Colour and odour Refer to Note 1 - Refer to Note 1
2 Suspended solids mg/l, max. 100 600 200
3 Particle size of suspended solids Shall 850 micron IS
sieve
- -
4 PH value 5.5 to 9.0 5.5 to 9.0 5.5 to 9.0
5 Temperature Shall not exceed 50
C above the
receiving water
temperature
- -
6 Oil and grease, mg/l max, 10 20 10
7 Total residual chlorine, mg/l max 1.0 - -
8 Ammonical nitrogen (as N), mg/l max. 50 50 -
9 Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (as N); mg/l max 100 - -
10 Free ammonia (as NH3), mg/l max 5.0 - -
11 Biochemical oxygen demand (3 days at
270 C), mg/l max
30 350 100
12 Chemical oxygen demand, mg/l max 250 - -
13 Arsenic (as As) mg/l, max 0.2 0.2 0.2
14 Mercury (As Hg) mg/l max. 0.01 0.01 -
15 Lead (as Pb) mg/l, max 0.1 1.0 -
16 Cadmium (as Cd) mg/l, max 2.0 1.0 -
17 Hexavalent chromium (as Cr +6) mg/1
max
0.1 2.0 -
18 Total chromium (as Cr) mg/1 max 2.0 2.0 -
19 Copper (as Cu) mg/1, max 3.0 3.0 -
20 Zinc (as Zn) 5.0 15 -
21 Selenium (as Se) 0.05 0.05 -
22 Nickel (as Ni) mg/1,max 3.0 3.0 -
23 Cyanide (as CN) mg/1,max 0.2 2.0 0.2
24 Fluoride (as F) mg/1,max 2.0 15 -
25 Dissolved phosphates (as P) mg/1,max 5.0 - -
26 Sulphide (as S) mg/1,max 2.0 - -
27 Phenolic compounds (as C6H5OH)
mg/1,max
1.0 5.0 -
28 Radioactive materials: (a) Alpha emitters
micro curie mg/1,max
(b) Beta emitters micro curie mg/1
10-7
10-6
10-7
10-6
10-8
10--7
29 Bio-assay test 90% survival of fish
after 96 hours in
100% effluent
90% survival of
fish after 96
hours in 100%
effluent
90% survival of
fish after 96
hours in 100%
effluent
30 Manganese 2 mg/1 2 mg/1 -
31 Iron (as Fe) 3mg/1 3mg/1 -
32 Vanadium (as V) 0.2 mg/1 0.2 mg/1 -
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
C5
S.
N
Parameter Standards
Inland surface
water
Public sewers Land for
Irrigation
33 Nitrate Nitrogen 10 mg/1 - -
Source: as per G.S.R 422 (E) dated 19.05.1993 and G.S.R 801 (E) dated 31.12.1993 issued under the
provisions of E (P) Act 1986.
Designated Best Use Classification of Surface Water
The designated best use classification as prescribed by CPCB for surface water
is as given in Table 5 below:
Table .5 Primary Water Quality Criteria for Designated-Best-Use-Classes
Designated-Best-Use Class
Criteria
Drinking Water Source
without conventional
treatment but after
disinfection
A Total Coliforms Organism MPN/100ml shall be 50 or
less
pH between 6.5 and 8.5
Dissolved Oxygen 6mg/l or more
Biochemical Oxygen Demand 5 days 20oC 2mg/l or
less
Outdoor bathing
(Organized)
B Total Coliforms Organism MPN/100ml shall be 500 or
less
pH between 6.5 and 8.5
Dissolved Oxygen 5mg/l or more
Biochemical Oxygen Demand 5 days 20oC 3mg/l or
less
Drinking water source
after conventional
treatment and
disinfection
C Total Coliforms Organism MPN/100ml shall be 5000
or less
pH between 6 to 9
Dissolved Oxygen 4mg/l or more
Biochemical Oxygen Demand 5 days 20oC 3mg/l or
less
Propagation of Wild life
and Fisheries
D pH between 6.5 to 8.5
Dissolved Oxygen 4mg/l or more
Free Ammonia (as N) 1.2 mg/l or less
Irrigation, Industrial
Cooling, Controlled
Waste disposal
E pH between 6.0 to 8.5
Electrical Conductivity at 25oC micro mhos/cm
Max.2250
Sodium absorption Ratio Max. 26
Boron Max. 2mg/l
Below-E Not Meeting A, B, C, D & E Criteria
Source: Central Pollution Control Board
IFC/WB Guidelines for Treated Sanitary Sewage Discharge
Indicative values for treated sanitary sewage discharges are given in Table 6.
These are applicable to meet national or local standards or in the absence of
national standards for sanitary wastewater discharges and where either a
septic system or land is used as part of treatment system.
Table.6 Indicative values for treated sanitary wastewater discharges
Pollutants Units Guideline Value
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
C6
Pollutants Units Guideline Value
pH pH 6-9
BOD mg/l 30
COD mg/l 125
Total Nitrogen mg/l 10
Total Phosphorous mg/l 2
Oil and grease mg/l 10
Total suspended solids mg/l 50
Total Coliform bacteria MPN*/100ml 400
Source: General EHS Guidelines, World Bank Group, April 2007
*MPN = Most Probable Number
1.1.3 Noise Standards
Noise standards specified by the MoEFCC vide gazette notification dated 14th
February, 2000 based on the A weighted equivalent noise level (Leq) are as
presented in Table.7.
Table.7 Ambient Noise Standards
Area Code Category of Area Limits in dB(A) Leq
Day time* Night Time
A Industrial Area 75 70
B Commercial Area 65 55
C Residential Area 55 45
D Silence Zone** 50 40
Note:*Day time is from 6 am to 10 pm, Night time is10.00 pm to 6.00 am;**Silence zone is an area comprising
not less than 100 meters around premises of hospitals, educational institutions, courts, religious places or any
other area which is declared as such by the competent authority. Use of vehicle horns, loud speakers and
bursting of crackers are banned in these zones. Source: Noise Pollution (Regulation and control)Rules,2000)
As the project is in rural/residential set up, noise standards for residential
area will be applicable for the project.
IFC/WB Noise Standards
As per the IFC/WB, General EHS Guidelines on noise management, noise
impacts should not exceed the levels presented in Table 8 or result in a
maximum increase in background levels of 3 dB at the nearest receptor
location off-site.
Table.8 Noise Level Guidelines
Receptor
One Hour LAeq (dBA)
Daytime
07:00 - 22:00
Night time
22:00 - 07:00
Residential;
Institutional;
Educational
55
45
Industrial;
Commercial
70 70
Source: IFC/WB, General EHS Guidelines on noise management, 30 April, 2007
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
C7
1.1.4 Hazardous Waste Management
The Hazardous Wastes (Management, Handling and Transboundary
Movement) Rules, 2008 were promulgated under Environment (Protection)
Act 1986, which was further amended in July 2009, September 2009, March
2010 and August 2010.
The major hazardous wastes to be released due to the proposed project are
used or waste/used oil, oil containing rags and jutes. The categories of the
wastes as applicable to construction and operation phases of the project and as
covered under Schedule 1 of the Hazardous wastes Rules, 2008 are given in
the Table 9.
Table.9 List of Hazardous Wastes Generated in the Project: Schedule-1 of HWM
Rules, 2008
Category No. Processes Hazardous Wastes
5 Industrial operations using
mineral/synthetic oil as lubricant in
hydraulic systems or other applications
5.1 Used spent Oil
5.2 Wastes/ residues containing
oil
Schedule V (Part A) to these rules provide specifications for Used Oil suitable
for reprocessing /recycling as given in Table 10. If the specifications are
exceeded the oil should be incinerated properly.
Table 10 Specifications of Used Oil Suitable for Recycling: Schedule V (Part A)
S.N Parameter Limit
1 Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) < 2ppm maximum
2 Lead 100 ppm maximum
3 Arsenic 5 ppm maximum
4 Cadmium+ Chromium+ Nickel 500 ppm maximum
5 Polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) 6% maximum
The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) has stipulated different
environmental standards w.r.t. ambient air quality, noise quality, water and
waste water for the country as a whole under EP Act, 1986.
Annex D
Environmental Monitoring
Results Ambient Air Quality
Annex E
Environmental Monitoring
Results Ambient Noise
Quality
Annex F
Environmental Monitoring
Results Surface Water Quality
Annex G
Environmental Monitoring
Results Ground Water
Quality
Annex H
Environmental Monitoring
Results Soil Quality
Annex I
Project Shadow Flicker
Assessment Data Overview
windPRO 3.0.639 by EMD International A/S, Tel. +45 96 35 44 44, www.emd.dk, [email protected] windPRO7/21/2016 9:22 AM / 1
Project:
Orange_BellugupaDescription:
100.8 MW Wind Farm Project near Beluguppa Village, AnantapurDistrict, Andhra Pradesh
Licensed user:
ERM India Private Limited Building 10, 4th Floor, Tower A, DLF Cyber CityIN-122002 Gurgaon+91 124 4170300Naval Chaudhary / [email protected]:
7/19/2016 2:35 PM/3.0.639
SHADOW - Main ResultCalculation: ShadowAssumptions for shadow calculationsMaximum distance for influenceCalculate only when more than 20 % of sun is covered by the bladePlease look in WTG table
Minimum sun height over horizon for influence 3 °Day step for calculation 1 daysTime step for calculation 1 minutes
Sunshine probability S (Average daily sunshine hours) [GOA / PANJIM]Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
10.04 10.28 9.34 9.65 9.45 4.31 3.22 4.18 5.94 7.85 9.14 9.61
Operational timeN NNE ENE E ESE SSE S SSW WSW W WNW NNW Sum145 93 318 1,452 1,106 156 110 76 1,003 2,248 346 156 7,209
Idle start wind speed: Cut in wind speed from power curve
A ZVI (Zones of Visual Influence) calculation is performed before flickercalculation so non visible WTG do not contribute to calculated flickervalues. A WTG will be visible if it is visible from any part of the receiverwindow. The ZVI calculation is based on the following assumptions:Height contours used: Elevation Grid Data Object: Orange_Bellugupa_EMDGrid_0.wpg (1)Obstacles used in calculationEye height: 1.5 mGrid resolution: 20.0 m
All coordinates are inUTM (north)-WGS84 Zone: 43
WTGsWTG type Shadow data
Easting Northing Z Row data/Description Valid Manufact. Type-generator Power, Rotor Hub Calculation RPMrated diameter height distance
[m] [kW] [m] [m] [m] [RPM]BLD-076 726,967 1,629,378 482.1 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-007 724,235 1,626,859 482.9 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-008 724,425 1,627,329 480.3 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-009 724,157 1,627,761 482.3 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-010 723,818 1,628,120 479.5 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-011 723,366 1,628,655 473.9 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-012 723,078 1,628,880 474.1 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-013 723,227 1,629,369 471.0 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-014 723,151 1,629,821 467.5 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-015 725,966 1,628,436 474.7 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-016 726,124 1,627,974 479.9 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-017 726,612 1,627,617 484.1 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-018 726,736 1,627,032 480.2 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-024 728,225 1,627,147 483.7 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-025 727,976 1,627,668 482.1 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-026 727,542 1,628,115 481.1 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-027 727,359 1,628,568 482.3 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-028 727,472 1,629,035 483.0 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-075 731,375 1,629,040 480.3 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-077 731,816 1,628,201 477.4 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-078 731,900 1,627,827 475.6 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-079 731,311 1,627,167 476.7 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-080 730,875 1,626,724 476.7 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-081 731,317 1,626,022 482.3 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-082 731,292 1,625,496 486.1 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-083 731,263 1,624,968 486.7 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-084 732,151 1,624,801 484.5 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-085 731,541 1,624,148 489.7 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-086 734,097 1,625,966 488.0 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-087 733,847 1,626,377 481.4 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-088 733,666 1,627,040 480.9 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-089 733,379 1,627,474 484.8 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-090 733,382 1,627,933 488.6 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0
To be continued on next page...
windPRO 3.0.639 by EMD International A/S, Tel. +45 96 35 44 44, www.emd.dk, [email protected] windPRO7/21/2016 9:22 AM / 2
Project:
Orange_BellugupaDescription:
100.8 MW Wind Farm Project near Beluguppa Village, AnantapurDistrict, Andhra Pradesh
Licensed user:
ERM India Private Limited Building 10, 4th Floor, Tower A, DLF Cyber CityIN-122002 Gurgaon+91 124 4170300Naval Chaudhary / [email protected]:
7/19/2016 2:35 PM/3.0.639
SHADOW - Main ResultCalculation: Shadow
...continued from previous pageWTG type Shadow data
Easting Northing Z Row data/Description Valid Manufact. Type-generator Power, Rotor Hub Calculation RPMrated diameter height distance
[m] [kW] [m] [m] [m] [RPM]BLG-123 735,742 1,626,712 485.6 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-124 736,052 1,626,397 489.9 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-125 736,336 1,625,936 487.3 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-152 737,582 1,631,468 492.4 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-153 737,555 1,630,743 492.2 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-154 737,491 1,630,225 489.3 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-155 737,569 1,629,824 487.5 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-156 737,446 1,629,375 483.4 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-157 737,381 1,629,014 485.0 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-158 737,223 1,628,529 492.0 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-159 737,084 1,628,064 488.7 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-160 737,217 1,627,595 491.0 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-161 737,660 1,626,908 497.1 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-162 737,559 1,626,456 502.8 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0BLG-163 737,563 1,625,983 499.6 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! Yes Suzlon S111-2,100 2,100 111.8 90.0 1,000 0.0
Shadow receptor-InputNo. Name Easting Northing Z Width Height Height Degrees from Slope of Direction mode
a.g.l. south cw window[m] [m] [m] [m] [°] [°]
A House 722,979 1,629,496 470.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 -43.5 90.0 Fixed directionB House 722,918 1,629,610 469.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 -135.6 90.0 Fixed directionC House 723,180 1,630,274 465.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 90.0 Fixed directionD House 726,066 1,628,871 474.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 9.5 90.0 Fixed directionE House 726,116 1,628,810 471.6 1.0 1.0 1.0 23.9 90.0 Fixed directionG House 728,671 1,627,038 486.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 -238.0 90.0 Fixed directionH House 728,579 1,627,011 486.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 -248.8 90.0 Fixed directionI House 728,494 1,626,985 488.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 -227.7 90.0 Fixed directionJ House 728,447 1,626,915 487.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 -215.7 90.0 Fixed directionK House 728,437 1,626,786 490.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 -215.6 90.0 Fixed directionL House 728,442 1,626,709 491.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 -198.5 90.0 Fixed directionM House 728,588 1,626,850 489.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 -225.2 90.0 Fixed directionN House 726,644 1,629,101 480.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 -136.6 90.0 Fixed directionO House 726,566 1,629,100 480.3 1.0 1.0 1.0 -126.8 90.0 Fixed directionP Warehouse 730,422 1,626,883 476.3 1.0 1.0 1.0 -71.2 90.0 Fixed directionQ House 737,275 1,628,740 489.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 17.0 90.0 Fixed directionR House 737,202 1,628,739 488.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 -1.5 90.0 Fixed directionS House 737,113 1,628,747 491.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 -14.8 90.0 Fixed directionT House 737,016 1,628,752 489.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 -35.0 90.0 Fixed directionU House 737,287 1,628,795 489.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 202.6 90.0 Fixed directionV House 737,198 1,628,801 487.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 212.6 90.0 Fixed directionW House 737,112 1,628,806 488.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 222.9 90.0 Fixed directionX House 737,059 1,628,864 488.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 249.0 90.0 Fixed directionY House 736,934 1,628,898 490.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 -119.2 90.0 Fixed direction
Calculation ResultsShadow receptor
Shadow, worst case Shadow, expected valuesNo. Name Shadow hours Shadow days Max shadow Shadow hours
per year per year hours per day per year[h/year] [days/year] [h/day] [h/year]
A House 172:06 130 1:31 83:42B House 0:00 0 0:00 0:00C House 0:00 0 0:00 0:00D House 0:00 0 0:00 0:00E House 0:00 0 0:00 0:00G House 84:46 124 0:57 27:42H House 101:34 100 1:11 25:48I House 0:00 0 0:00 0:00J House 0:00 0 0:00 0:00K House 0:00 0 0:00 0:00
To be continued on next page...
windPRO 3.0.639 by EMD International A/S, Tel. +45 96 35 44 44, www.emd.dk, [email protected] windPRO7/21/2016 9:22 AM / 3
Project:
Orange_BellugupaDescription:
100.8 MW Wind Farm Project near Beluguppa Village, AnantapurDistrict, Andhra Pradesh
Licensed user:
ERM India Private Limited Building 10, 4th Floor, Tower A, DLF Cyber CityIN-122002 Gurgaon+91 124 4170300Naval Chaudhary / [email protected]:
7/19/2016 2:35 PM/3.0.639
SHADOW - Main ResultCalculation: Shadow
...continued from previous pageShadow, worst case Shadow, expected values
No. Name Shadow hours Shadow days Max shadow Shadow hoursper year per year hours per day per year[h/year] [days/year] [h/day] [h/year]
L House 0:00 0 0:00 0:00M House 0:00 0 0:00 0:00N House 15:21 39 0:29 7:16O House 12:35 36 0:26 5:56P Warehouse 89:39 160 0:55 44:05Q House 0:00 0 0:00 0:00R House 0:00 0 0:00 0:00S House 0:00 0 0:00 0:00T House 0:00 0 0:00 0:00U House 0:00 0 0:00 0:00V House 0:00 0 0:00 0:00W House 0:00 0 0:00 0:00X House 81:46 84 1:11 22:33Y House 79:46 113 0:57 29:22
Total amount of flickering on the shadow receptors caused by each WTGNo. Name Worst case Expected
[h/year] [h/year]BLD-076 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-007 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-008 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-009 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-010 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-011 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-012 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-013 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 172:06 83:42BLG-014 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-015 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-016 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-017 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-018 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-024 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 134:31 38:09BLG-025 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-026 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-027 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-028 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 15:39 7:25BLG-075 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-077 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-078 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-079 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 19:30 7:12BLG-080 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 70:09 36:25BLG-081 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-082 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-083 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-084 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-085 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-086 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-087 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-088 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-089 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-090 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-123 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-124 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-125 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-152 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-153 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-154 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-155 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-156 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-157 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 130:41 41:45BLG-158 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-159 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00
To be continued on next page...
windPRO 3.0.639 by EMD International A/S, Tel. +45 96 35 44 44, www.emd.dk, [email protected] windPRO7/21/2016 9:22 AM / 4
Project:
Orange_BellugupaDescription:
100.8 MW Wind Farm Project near Beluguppa Village, AnantapurDistrict, Andhra Pradesh
Licensed user:
ERM India Private Limited Building 10, 4th Floor, Tower A, DLF Cyber CityIN-122002 Gurgaon+91 124 4170300Naval Chaudhary / [email protected]:
7/19/2016 2:35 PM/3.0.639
SHADOW - Main ResultCalculation: Shadow
...continued from previous pageNo. Name Worst case Expected
[h/year] [h/year]BLG-160 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-161 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-162 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00BLG-163 Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! 0:00 0:00
Annex J
Project Shadow Calendar
Graphical
windPRO 3.0.639 by EMD International A/S, Tel. +45 96 35 44 44, www.emd.dk, [email protected] windPRO7/21/2016 9:23 AM / 1
Project:
Orange_BellugupaDescription:
100.8 MW Wind Farm Project near Beluguppa Village, AnantapurDistrict, Andhra Pradesh
Licensed user:
ERM India Private Limited Building 10, 4th Floor, Tower A, DLF Cyber CityIN-122002 Gurgaon+91 124 4170300Naval Chaudhary / [email protected]:
7/19/2016 2:35 PM/3.0.639
SHADOW - Calendar, graphicalCalculation: Shadow
WTGs
BLG-013: Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! BLG-024: Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O!
windPRO 3.0.639 by EMD International A/S, Tel. +45 96 35 44 44, www.emd.dk, [email protected] windPRO7/21/2016 9:23 AM / 2
Project:
Orange_BellugupaDescription:
100.8 MW Wind Farm Project near Beluguppa Village, AnantapurDistrict, Andhra Pradesh
Licensed user:
ERM India Private Limited Building 10, 4th Floor, Tower A, DLF Cyber CityIN-122002 Gurgaon+91 124 4170300Naval Chaudhary / [email protected]:
7/19/2016 2:35 PM/3.0.639
SHADOW - Calendar, graphicalCalculation: Shadow
WTGs
BLG-024: Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O!
windPRO 3.0.639 by EMD International A/S, Tel. +45 96 35 44 44, www.emd.dk, [email protected] windPRO7/21/2016 9:23 AM / 3
Project:
Orange_BellugupaDescription:
100.8 MW Wind Farm Project near Beluguppa Village, AnantapurDistrict, Andhra Pradesh
Licensed user:
ERM India Private Limited Building 10, 4th Floor, Tower A, DLF Cyber CityIN-122002 Gurgaon+91 124 4170300Naval Chaudhary / [email protected]:
7/19/2016 2:35 PM/3.0.639
SHADOW - Calendar, graphicalCalculation: Shadow
WTGs
BLG-028: Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! BLG-079: Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O! BLG-080: Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O!
windPRO 3.0.639 by EMD International A/S, Tel. +45 96 35 44 44, www.emd.dk, [email protected] windPRO7/21/2016 9:23 AM / 4
Project:
Orange_BellugupaDescription:
100.8 MW Wind Farm Project near Beluguppa Village, AnantapurDistrict, Andhra Pradesh
Licensed user:
ERM India Private Limited Building 10, 4th Floor, Tower A, DLF Cyber CityIN-122002 Gurgaon+91 124 4170300Naval Chaudhary / [email protected]:
7/19/2016 2:35 PM/3.0.639
SHADOW - Calendar, graphicalCalculation: Shadow
WTGs
BLG-157: Suzlon S111 2100 111.8 !O!
ERM consulting services worldwide www.erm.com
ERM has over 1 0 offices
Across the following
countries worldwide
Argentina Netherlands
Australia Peru
Belgium Poland
Brazil Portugal
China Puerto Rico
France Singapore
Germany Spain
Hong Kong Sweden
Hungary Taiwan
India Thailand
Indonesia UK
Ireland USA
Italy Venezuela
Japan Vietnam
Korea
Malaysia
Mexico
ERM India Private Limited
Building 10, 4th Floor
Tower A, DLF Cyber City
Gurgaon – 122 002, NCR , India
Tel: 91 124 417 0300
Fax: 91 124 417 0301
Regional Office – West
102, Boston House,
Suren Road, Chakala
Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (East)
Mumbai- 400093 India
Office Board Telephone: 91- 22 -4210 7373 (30 lines)
Fax: 91- 022- 4210 7474
Regional Office – West
702 Abhishree Avenue,
Near Nehru Nagar Circle, Ambawadi
Ahmedabad -380006 India
Tel: +91 79 66214300
Fax: +91 79 66214301
Regional Office -South
Ground Floor, Delta Block
Sigma Soft Tech Park
Whitefield, Main Road
Bangalore- 560 066, India
Tel: +91 80 49366 300 (Board)
Regional Office –East
4th Floor, Asyst Park,
GN-37/1, Sector-V,
Salt Lake City,
Kolkata 700 091
Tel : 033-40450300
www.erm.com
NOC FROM PANCHAYATS Annexure 2
Translated NOC Gram Panchayath Resolution
Beluguppa Mandal Beluguppa Gram Panchayath During the year 2016, -------- month, on date ------ at 11:00 Hrs, under the chairmanship of Gram Panchayat Sarpanch, the Gram Panchayat memers have assembled and in this meeting the following resolution was unanimously agreed. Subject it was thoroughly discussed about the issue of “No Objection Certificate” regarding the establishment of windmills in the lands purchased by the M/S Sujaalan Gujarat Wind Park Limited by customers Orange Uravakonda Wind Power Private Limited, wherever needed, in the private lands of Narinjagundla Palli revenue villages within the limits of Narinjagundla Palli Gram Panchayath of Beluguppa Mandal. Resolution It was discussed and resolved in the Gram Panchayat that there is no objection for the establishment of Windmills as per the application of the M/S Sujaalan Gujarat Wind Park Limited, Hyderabad. Sd. Sarpanch Beluguppa Gram Panchayat Beluguppa Mandal
NOC from Belaguppa
NOC FROM PANCHAYATS Annexure 2
NOC FROM PANCHAYATS Annexure 2
NOC from Shreegangapuram
NOC FROM PANCHAYATS Annexure 2
NOC from Nakkalpalli
NOC FROM PANCHAYATS Annexure 2
NOC from Duddekunta
NOC FROM PANCHAYATS Annexure 2
NOC from Yerraguddi
NOC FROM PANCHAYATS Annexure 2
NOC from Thagguparthy
Annexure- 4
SOCIAL SAFEGUARDS SCREENING CHECKLIST
Subproject: 100 MW Wind Power Project at Belaguppa in Anantapur District of Andhra Pradesh I. Involuntary Resettlement Impact Checklist
Probable Involuntary Resettlement Effects Yes No Not
Known Remarks
Involuntary Acquisition of Land
1. Will there be land acquisition?
√ Required land was procured through direct purchase from landowners. No involuntary acquisition of land
2. Is the site for land acquisition known?
√
3. Is the ownership status and current usage of land to be acquired known?
√ All land purchased for the Project was owned by private landowners. The land use type of purchased land was agricultural.
4. Will easement be utilized within an existing Right of Way (ROW)?
√
5. Will there be loss of shelter and residential land due to land acquisition?
√
6. Will there be loss of agricultural and other productive assets due to land acquisition?
√ Low productive agricultural land has been purchased directly for the Project and not acquired. Hence there is no loss
7. Will there be losses of crops, trees, and fixed assets due to land acquisition?
√
8. Will there be loss of businesses or enterprises due to land acquisition?
√
9. Will there be loss of income sources and means of livelihoods due to land acquisition?
√
Involuntary restrictions on land use or on access to legally designated parks and protected areas 10. Will people lose access to natural resources, communal facilities and services?
√
11. If land use is changed, will it have an adverse impact on social and economic activities?
√ Land use of the purchased land is changed from agricultural to industrial for the Project. However, this will not have any adverse impacts.
12. Will access to land and resources owned communally or by the state be restricted?
√
Information on Displaced Persons:
Annexure- 4
Any estimate of the likely number of persons that will be displaced by the Subproject? [√ ] No [ ] Yes If yes, approximately how many? ______________________ Are any of them poor, female-heads of households, or vulnerable to poverty risks? [ ] No [ ] Yes Are any displaced persons from indigenous or ethnic minority groups? [√ ] No [ ] Yes
2. Indigenous Peoples Impact Screening Checklist
KEY CONCERNS
(Please provide elaborations on the Remarks column)
YES NO NOT KNOWN Remarks
Indigenous Peoples Identification
1. Are there socio-cultural groups present in or use the subproject area who may be considered as "tribes" (hill tribes, schedules tribes, tribal peoples), "minorities" (ethnic or national minorities), or "indigenous communities" in the subproject area?
√
2. Are there national or local laws or policies as well as anthropological researches/studies that consider these groups present in or using the subproject area as belonging to "ethnic minorities", scheduled tribes, tribal peoples, national minorities, or cultural communities?
Not Applicable
3. Do such groups self-identify as being part of a distinct social and cultural group?
Not Applicable
4. Do such groups maintain collective attachments to distinct habitats or ancestral territories and/or to the natural resources in these habitats and territories?
Not Applicable
5. Do such groups maintain cultural, economic, social, and political institutions distinct from the dominant society and culture?
Not Applicable
6. Do such groups speak a distinct language or dialect?
Not Applicable
7. Has such groups been historically, socially and economically marginalized, disempowered, excluded, and/or discriminated against?
Not Applicable
8. Are such groups represented as "Indigenous Peoples" or as "ethnic minorities" or "scheduled tribes" or "tribal populations" in any formal decision-making bodies at the national or local levels?
Not Applicable
B. Identification of Potential Impacts
9. Will the subproject directly or indirectly benefit or target Indigenous Peoples?
Not Applicable
10. Will the subproject directly or indirectly affect Indigenous Peoples' traditional socio-cultural and belief practices? (e.g. child-rearing, health, education, arts, and governance)
√
Annexure- 4
KEY CONCERNS
(Please provide elaborations on the Remarks column)
YES NO NOT KNOWN Remarks
11. Will the subproject affect the livelihood systems of Indigenous Peoples? (e.g., food production system, natural resource management, crafts and trade, employment status)
√
12. Will the subproject be in an area (land or territory) occupied, owned, or used by Indigenous Peoples, and/or claimed as ancestral domain?
√
C. Identification of Special Requirements Will the subproject activities include:
13. Commercial development of the cultural resources and knowledge of Indigenous Peoples?
√
14. Physical displacement from traditional or customary lands?
√
15. Commercial development of natural resources (such as minerals, hydrocarbons, forests, water, hunting or fishing grounds) within customary lands under use that would impact the livelihoods or the cultural, ceremonial, spiritual uses that define the identity and community of Indigenous Peoples?
√
16. Establishing legal recognition of rights to lands and territories that are traditionally owned or customarily used, occupied or claimed by indigenous peoples ?
√
17. Acquisition of lands that are traditionally owned or customarily used, occupied or claimed by indigenous peoples ?
√
D. Anticipated subproject impacts on Indigenous Peoples
Subproject component/ activity/ output Anticipated positive effect Anticipated negative effect
1. Establishment of Wind Power Plant
Indirect only as it is a power generation project.
none
2. Land requirement
none No IP community land involved and/or affected by the project.