- Concerns mount over project launched by former MR Govt.
- Environmentalists claim soil layers surrounding tunnel unstable
- Cites numerous issues in Environmental Impact Assessment
- 2018 NAO report notes deviations from Mahaweli Master Plan
The National Building Research Organisation (NBRO) has uncovered a substantial ground disturbance in the Karandagolla and Maliththagolla areas, adjacent to the recently-inaugurated controversial Uma Oya Multipurpose Development Project (UOMDP).
The project has come under intense scrutiny, with environmentalists warning that the soil layers surrounding the tunnel in the Uma Oya are unstable, evidenced by numerous cracks observed.
Therefore, the project, which was inaugurated by Iranian President Dr. Seyyed Ebrahim Raisi and President Ranil Wickremesinghe last month, touted as a monumental achievement in irrigation and hydroelectric power, now faces concerns of potential disaster due to unstable soil layers surrounding the tunnel.
The project was launched in 2008 during the tenure of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa and is similar to the Mahaweli Development Project – one of Sri Lanka’s largest irrigation ventures.
As environmentalists allege, the pressure exerted by water flowing through the tunnel aggravates soil instability, causing further cracks and peeling of soil layers. This poses significant risks to the structural integrity of the tunnel and surrounding infrastructure. Immediate action and thorough risk assessment are essential to address these concerns and prevent potential disasters, environmentalists warn.
In such a backdrop, speaking exclusively to The Sunday Morning, NBRO Director General Asiri Karunawardena yesterday (4) said a geophysical investigation had been initiated to understand the subsurface profile, water levels, and impacted areas comprehensively.
Additionally, he said that horizontal drains were being installed as a temporary measure to alleviate water pressure and ensure ground stability, prioritising road safety along the Ella-Wellawaya Road downstream.
NBRO experts – including technical engineers, geologists, and environmental specialists – have conducted a thorough assessment of the affected areas. Their findings indicate that the region has a history of landslides, with the current debris attributed to past events. The area’s instability, exacerbated by common occurrences of water seepage, has been further aggravated by heavy rains in 2023, leading to extensive ground disturbances.
While residents speculate about a link between changes in water pressure and the filling of the Uma Oya tunnel, Karunawardena highlighted the geological challenges in substantiating these claims, citing limited evidence. Nevertheless, he said that the NBRO was committed to conducting rigorous investigations and identifying permanent countermeasures to ensure long-term land stability.
Karandagolla and Maliththagolla residents have been evacuated by the NBRO, with 13 families permanently relocated so far and further efforts underway to assist remaining individuals affected by disrupted agricultural lands and paddy fields. The District Secretary has pledged support for these residents, emphasising on expedited evacuation measures.
The NBRO aims to conclude its investigations within a week and submit a comprehensive report. “We have already submitted a report last year,” Karunawardena confirmed.
Destabilisation of the ground
Speaking to The Sunday Morning, Movement for Land and Agricultural Reform (MONLAR) Member Sajeewa Chamikara highlighted significant shortcomings in the Uma Oya Project’s planning and execution. He emphasised on the absence of a disaster risk assessment and cited numerous issues with the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Remarkably, this project’s EIA attracted the highest number of appeals in history.
Despite these concerns, the Government proceeded with the project, conducting tunnelling even in areas with metamorphic rocks known for their resistance to deformation and weathering. However, this decision inadvertently destabilised the ground, resulting in surface cracks and damage to nearby buildings.
Moreover, the destabilisation has led to the seepage of groundwater to deeper levels, causing a decline in surface water levels and exacerbating water scarcity for agriculture and general consumption.
“The EIA for Uma Oya is one of the worst in the country’s history. Even this EIA states that the project is being implemented at a problematic geographical and geological location and that further geological investigations are needed to determine whether the bedrock conditions are suitable for the construction of tunnels,” Chamikara asserted.
“The environmental and social impact of the project could have been avoided if the then Mahinda Rajapaksa Government had carried out a comprehensive EIA,” Chamikara emphasised.
“Iran, on the other hand, believed that if money and technical assistance were provided, the Sri Lankan Government would act in the best interests of its citizens. However, as we’ve witnessed, successive Sri Lankan governments have shown little concern for the welfare of the people.”
Families affected
Chamikara highlighted that the challenges facing 17,000 families affected by the negative environmental impacts of the Uma Oya Project remained unresolved. “In December 2014, a leak sprung up in its 15.2 km tunnel, resulting in damage to thousands of homes and a loss of drinking and irrigation water, devastating the lives and livelihoods of thousands,” he stated.
According to him, the Ella, Bandarawela, Hali-Ela, Haputale, Welimada, and Uva Paranagama Divisional Secretariat areas bear the brunt of the impact.
“These families are yet to receive full compensation or have their grievances addressed. Initially, some families were provided with 500 litres of drinking water every two weeks, but this support was later discontinued. Now, people have to travel long distances to access water,” Chamikara lamented.
“Furthermore, the majority of those who lost their livelihoods and suffered property damage have not been adequately compensated,” he continued. “With their agricultural land rendered barren, many now seek employment as labourers in other areas. It is unlikely that the impacts of the leak will be fully mitigated even if the Government spends colossal amounts of money.”
Challenges faced
According to a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed between the Governments of Sri Lanka and Iran in 2007, it was agreed to initiate project activities in 2008 through Iran’s Farab Company.
The project aimed to provide irrigation for a 5,000 hectare area in the northeast dry zone by diverting water from Uma Oya to Kirindi Oya via a 20 km underground tunnel. Additionally, the project sought to generate electricity with a capacity of 100 MW through the construction of a hydropower station.
However, the UOMDP faced various challenges, including delays in land acquisition and feasibility studies. Consequently, project activities commenced only in 2010. Originally slated for commissioning in 2015, the project faced delays due to a leak.
Compounding these issues, sanctions imposed on the Iranian Government in 2013 hindered funding for the project, leading the Sri Lankan Government to shoulder all expenses thereafter. Initially estimated at $ 529 million, US sanctions on Iran led the Sri Lankan Treasury to assume around 80% of the financing burden.
Furthermore, the project encountered significant environmental and social challenges, particularly following water leakages in December 2014 and December 2016.
Uma Oya plays a crucial role in addressing Sri Lanka’s power sector challenges and is expected to alleviate strain on the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) by mitigating power shortages and saving millions of dollars typically spent on operating coal or petroleum fuel power plants.
Iran’s Tehran-based Farab Company serves as the Engineering, Procurement, and Construction (EPC) contractor for the multipurpose project, representing a significant endeavour for Iranian companies in exporting technical and engineering services. Implemented by the Ministry of Mahaweli Development and Environment, the project aims to harness Uma Oya’s potential.
According to the CEB’s Long-Term Generation Expansion Plan (LTGEP), the 122 MW Uma Oya Hydropower Plant, an integral component of the multipurpose project, is expected to generate 290 GWh of energy annually.
The project dates back to a pre-feasibility study conducted by the CEB in 1991, examining the diversion of Uma Oya, a Mahaweli River tributary. Subsequent feasibility studies, including one conducted by SNC-Lavalin Inc. of Canada in 2001, focused on various aspects, although they encountered challenges in completing the assessments comprehensively.
Complications with EIA process
Despite its potential benefits, the Uma Oya Project has faced controversy stemming from concerns about an inadequate EIA.
Initial feasibility studies in the late 1980s and early 1990s conducted by firms such as Lahamayor and the Central Engineering Consultancy Bureau (CECB) highlighted challenges and were rejected by international bodies like the Asian Development Bank (ADB).
On 9 July 2008, the Ministry of Irrigation and Water Resources Management forwarded an application to the Central Environmental Authority (CEA) seeking approval for the project. Subsequently, on 3 October 2008, the authority provided terms of reference for the evaluation process. The final evaluation report on the environmental effects was submitted by the Ministry of Irrigation and Water Resources Management to the CEA on 30 November 2010.
Approval for the project was granted by the authority for a period of three years, as per letter No.8/EIA/Water/01/2008 dated 12 April 2011, with various conditions based on the recommendations of the Technical Evaluation Committee. This approval period was extended twice, first on 2 September 2014 and again on 21 July 2017. Consequently, the initial three-year approval granted on 12 April 2011 was extended for a total of nine years, expiring on 12 April 2020.
The contract for preparing the Environmental Evaluation Report (EER) for the project’s approval was awarded to the Mahaweli Consultancy Bureau by the Ministry of Irrigation and Water Resources Management. The bureau subsequently entrusted this task to the University of Sri Jayewardenepura and the financial proposal was presented by the Mahaweli Consultancy Bureau for this endeavour. The EIA for the Uma Oya Project incurred a total cost of Rs. 43,376,638.
As per a Cabinet minute following discussions with relevant State institution officers and consideration of proposals by the Minister of Power and Energy at a meeting chaired by the then Minister of Finance with participation of the Ministers of Irrigation and Housing and Samurdhi in 2015, it was recommended to encompass various aspects of the UOMDP.
Some of these include investigating ground subsidence and landslides due to tunnel construction, assessing unstable ground locations, monitoring underground water levels, identifying waste disposal sites, implementing soil erosion prevention measures, and developing a detailed environmental management plan.
Immediate action was urged to reinforce unstable areas, prevent water leakage in the headrace tunnel, and conduct detailed surveys to address potential risks. Additionally, measures were proposed to establish coordinating and regulatory committees, ensure provision of drinking water to affected villages, and educate communities about preventive measures while assisting in damage assessment, compensation, and rehabilitation efforts.
Deviations from master plan
Meanwhile, a special audit report issued in 2018 by the National Audit Office (NAO) under the then Auditor General H.M. Gamini Wijesinghe highlighted several critical observations regarding the Uma Oya Project.
Firstly, it noted that the project deviated from the Mahaweli Master Plan by focusing on developing the Uma Oya interbasin instead of prioritising development within the basin. Additionally, construction had commenced before obtaining environmental permission, contravening standard procedures.
Furthermore, the report highlighted the absence of prior assessment of potential water leakage during tunnelling, leading to unpreparedness when leakage occurred. The NAO concluded that these deviations from the Mahaweli Master Plan, failure to conduct feasibility and environmental studies beforehand, lack of timely problem resolution, and the selection of contractors without transparency had contributed to the current problematic situation of the project.
Govt. response
In response to rumours regarding landslide risks associated with the UOMDP, State Minister of Power and Energy Indika Anuruddha Herath recently asserted that since the project’s public inauguration, no landslides or significant issues had been reported.
Speaking at a press conference organised by the President’s Media Unit (PMD), the Minister cautioned against misleading representations, emphasising that some individuals were attempting to deceive the public by highlighting minor waterfalls resulting from rainfall.
However, the Minister announced that a team of geologists would conduct an observational tour of the Uma Oya region to assess and document any reported cracks and floods.
He further disclosed that the country had incurred significant losses of approximately $ 200 billion due to the nine-year delay in completing the project, resulting in an estimated loss of $ 587 million over the past nine years. Despite the delay, electricity generation from the Uma Oya Project has not been integrated into the national grid, further contributing to the financial loss.
The Minister assured that despite misleading media reports, no such confirmed incidents related to the project had occurred. He affirmed, nonetheless, that the Government remained committed to addressing any identified issues through technical solutions, drawing from global expertise in prevention measures.
Disaster Management Centre (DMC) Director General Major General (Retd) Udaya Herath noted that the technical expert on the subject was the National Building Research Organisation (NBRO) and that the DMC was prepared to evacuate residents and provide them with facilities should the NBRO declare new risk areas.
“We inspected the area last week and geologists examined the alleged area. The NBRO is the expert institution on the subject. We will manage the situation depending on the outcomes of the NBRO findings,” he said.
When asked whether new risk areas had been identified, Herath noted that there were none.
When contacted by The Sunday Morning, Ministry of Irrigation Secretary Saman Pandikorala stated that the ministry was awaiting reports from both the NBRO and a team from the CECB, which recently inspected the area.
“Without reviewing the reports, it is challenging to provide any comments,” Pandikorala said.