Dam-Affected Peoples Launch Complaint Against the Allain Duhangan Project

 To the IFC Compliance Advisor Ombudsman:

We would like to lodge a complaint concerning the proposed 192 MW Allain Duhangan (Hydropower) Project (ADP) that IFC proposes to fund. 

We live in the villages near Manali in Beas river basin in Kulu district in Himachal Pradesh in Northern India.

We do not wish our identity to be disclosed.

The basis of the complaint is as follows:

1. The Environmental and Social Impacts Assessment (ESIA) of the project is fundamentally flawed as shown in a letter from affected villagers to the World Bank President dated May 21, 2004. This is clearly in violation of IFC Environmental and social norms.

2. The Public hearings held so far including the one on May 20-21 were under the circumstances were not useful to take the decision for or against the project as without full and proper impact assessment the affected people and others are not in a position to decide for or against the project. This is thus in violation of IFC policies requiring to give affected people a chance to give their opinion about the project, its impacts and management plan.

3. In spite of repeated requests (see (the latest) letters to IFC in May 2004, July 2004 for example) IFC has not changed the ESIA to address the fundamental inadequacies of the ESIA. The earliest letter with detailed critique of the ESIA was sent in November 2003 by the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP).

4. The village assembly of Jagatsukh village has not given no Objection Certificate for the project as is legally required. In fact on July 4, 2004 the Jagatsukh village assembly unanimously passed a resolution rejecting the No Objection Certificate to the project and opposing the project. And yet IFC has been claiming that the project has an NOC as claimed to them by the company. (see IFC letter dated Dec 12 2003)

5. The project is likely to dry up the Duhangan river, which is a lifeline for Jagatsukh village as the whole village (as some others) depend on the river for their drinking water, for their irrigation water and the river has great cultural and religious significance for the village. The concerns of the village people on this issue has not been satisfactorily addressed by the company, the ESIA consultants or the IFC in spite of repeated reminders about these concerns. These and other concerns of the affected people have been supported by a number of reports including some from the persons and committees appointed by the IFC. Some of such reports (attached) include:

• The report of the Kalpavriksha team to affected villages on May 1, 2004
• The report of the Independent Panel that conducted the public hearings on May 20 and 21, 2004
• The report of the visit by Shri Harsh Mander to the affected villages in July 2004 on behalf of IFC
• Letter from Kalpavriksha to the World Bank President dated August 2004

6. The affected people have many other serious concerns including insecurity due to the presence of large number of outsiders in the villages, due to geological instability that the project will inflict on the village and surroundings, the destruction of their livelihoods due the project impacts on apple cultivation, on tourism and on the environment, the behavior of the company, the IFC and the ESIA consultants with the village people for all these months, among others. Most of these concerns have been supported by the independent assessments as listed in point 5 above.

1. A description of the name, location and nature of the project is as follows:

The project is a 192 MW hydro electric project on Allain and Duhangan rivers, that are tributaries of Beas river, which in turn is a tributary of the Indus river. There are to be two dam structures on the Allain and Duhangan streams, water from Duhangan stream is to be totally diverted to the Allain river and both are then to pass through underground tunnels and power house. The water from the power house would return to the Allain stream.

2. IFC or MIGA is involved with the project (as applicable):

IFC intends to provide USD 45 million (in the form of equity and debt) to the USD 192 Million cost of the project.

3. The project sponsor is:

Rajasthan Spinning and Weaving Mills Limited

4. We are likely to be affected by social or environmental impacts of the project in the following way(s):

(See for details the description above or the attached documents). Diversion of Duhangan stream, drying up of water sources, impact on livelihoods through impacts on environment, on apple cultivation and yields, on tourism, inflicting of insecurity, particularly for the women, destruction of cultural and religious places and river, geological instability.

5. The following action has been taken by me/us to try to resolve these issues:

Letters written by the affected people starting from October 23 2003 to July 2004, messages and letters from SANDRP and other support organisations.

6. The name of any contact person(s) at IFC or MIGA are:

• Shalabh Tandon, Senior Investment Officer, IFC, Delhi: standon [at] ifc [dot] org
• Richard English, Environment Specialist, IFC, Washington DC: renglish [at] ifc [dot] org

7. We have had contact with the following other person(s) in attempting to resolve these issues:

Shalabh Tandon, Richard English, World Bank President, ESIA consultants, Shekhar Singh and his team, Kalpavriksha team, Hash Mander

8. The following are details of policies, guidelines or procedures of IFC or MIGA that have not been complied with:

IFC’s Information Disclosure Policy, IFC’s OP 4.01 for Environmental Assessment, OD 4.30 for Involuntary Resettlement, and the new OP 4.12, Involuntary Resettlement, OP 4.37 for non disclosure of dam height from lowest foundation levels, any other as applicable.

9. We would like to see this complaint resolved in the following way:

If possible, stop IFC funding to the project that is not acceptable to the people or to modify it to people’s satisfaction before IFC funds the project.

Any other relevant facts to support this complaint are:

The company that IFC is intending to fund through the project does not have confidence inspiring track record. IFC has not been responding to request for information or response in any adequate way and at times have tried to use unacceptable means of pressuring the people in various ways.

Copies of relevant documents and other material mentioned in this complaint are attached as listed below.

Attachments:
Letter from Affected villagers to the World Bank President on May 21 2004
SANDRP letter to IFC with ESIA critique in Nov 2003
Jagatsukh Assembly resolution of July 4, 2004 refusing No Objection Certificate to the ADP
IFC response to affected people and SANDRP on Dec 12 2003
Letter to World Bank President on Nov 21 2003 with summary of EIA critique

Date: September 15, 2004

Signature(s): (Name, villages, and signature)