The NEA force majeure declaration over the Dana-Kushma transmission line arrived as a single letter, not a press release. Written by the Nepal Electricity Authority’s Business Development Directorate, Power Trading Department, and numbered अ.नं. 443, the letter dated 2083/06/12 (September 28, 2026) states that on 2083/06/11 (September 27, 2026), a severe flood and landslide in the Kaligandaki river damaged a tower of the Dana-Kushma 220 kV transmission line in Myagdi district, disrupting power flow. The Authority declares this a force-majeure situation (काबु बाहिरको परिस्थिति), and says that under clause 10.2 of the power purchase agreements, the PPAs’ force-majeure provisions will apply for the duration of the outage. The notice reached NEPSE on October 1, 2026, filed by Ghalemdi Hydro Limited (NEPSE: GHL), whose own project is on the affected list.
The letter names seven projects and their capacities, and the arithmetic is worth doing out loud. Mistri Khola contributes 42 MW, Nilgiri Khola I 38 MW, Nilgiri Khola II 71 MW, Thapa Khola 13.6 MW, Rile Khola 6 MW, Ghar Khola 14 MW and Ghalemdi Khola 5 MW: 42 + 38 + 71 + 13.6 + 6 + 14 + 5 = 189.6 MW of generation cut off by a single fallen tower. Of the project owners on that list, only Ghalemdi Hydro Limited is listed on NEPSE; the rest are unlisted, which means GHL’s shareholders are the only ones watching this story through a market price.
Why this letter matters more than the damage self-reports
On October 1, five listed hydropower companies filed their own flood-damage reports with NEPSE, the first wave of answers under SEBON’s disclosure order. Those filings describe damage from each company’s side: broken plants, repair timelines, lost income. NEA’s letter is different. It comes from the grid operator and the sole buyer, and it formally categorizes the outage as a force-majeure event under the PPAs. The companies can report what happened to their plants; only NEA can rule on what the event means for the contract that connects them.
This is the first time in this flood episode that the buyer has invoked the PPA’s force-majeure machinery on the record. The Kaligandaki flood did not just break individual plants, it broke the wire that carries their power out. A damaged tower is a single point of failure with a multiplication effect: seven independent plants, seven loan repayment schedules, seven operating budgets, all idle because of one structure in Myagdi.
What force majeure means here, and what it does not settle
Read the letter on its own terms. It says two things: a force-majeure situation has arisen, and clause 10.2 means the PPA’s force-majeure provisions apply during the outage period. That is the full extent of what NEA has committed to in writing. The letter names no repair timeline for the tower, no expected outage duration, and no revenue-impact figure. In general, force-majeure provisions in power purchase agreements govern how payments and obligations are treated when an event lies beyond either party’s control, which is precisely why investors will now be watching what comes next. Does the affected energy still get counted toward the PPA’s energy commitments? How do the fixed-charge components of the tariff behave while the line is down? The letter does not answer any of that; it only opens the door for those provisions to operate.
For GHL’s shareholders, the discipline of the moment is to treat the letter as a procedural notice, not a financial statement. It confirms the outage and its contractual classification. It does not quantify the hit to Ghalemdi Khola’s 5 MW of generation or to the company’s revenue. Any number attached to that loss before a company filing names it would be speculation, and the letter offers none.
What to watch now
Three open questions will decide how this story reads for investors. First, the tower: how long does it take NEA to restore the Dana-Kushma 220 kV line in Myagdi, and how long do the 189.6 MW stay dark? Second, the money: will NEA or the affected companies publish anything on the energy-payment treatment during the force-majeure window, which is where clause 10.2 either cushions the loss or leaves it with the projects? Third, the filings: GHL has already carried this letter to NEPSE, and any follow-up from the listed company on duration or cost will arrive through the same channel.
The grid operator has now put its position on record. The tower is down, the provision is invoked, and 189.6 MW waits. Everything that decides who carries the loss of those silent megawatts is still unwritten.
This article is research and education, not investment advice. All figures come from NEA’s letter अ.नं. 443 dated 2083/06/12, filed with NEPSE by Ghalemdi Hydro Limited on October 1, 2026; the letter discloses no revenue-impact figure, repair timeline or outage duration. Verify the official document before acting.