Vol - I - Main Report (Final Draft) PDF

Government of KP
SARHAD HYDEL DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION

(SHYDO)
Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan
FEASIBILITY STUDIES OF THREE HYDROPOWER PLANTS

(KOTO, JABORI, KARORA HPP)
IN KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA
FEASIBILITY REPORT (Final Draft)

JABORI HDROPOWER PROJECT
VOLUME I MAIN REPORT
May 2011
ASSOCIATED CONSULTING ENGINEERS ACE (PVT) LTD.

1-C/2, M. M. Alam Road, Gulberg III Lahore
Ph.92-42-5759417-9, Fax No. 92-42-35878278 Email: aceron@brain.net.pk
Jabori Hydropower Project Final Feasibility Report TOC
JABORI HYDROPOWER PROJECT
FINAL FEASIBILITY REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Sr. No Description Page No
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background 1-1
1.2 Feasibility Studies Consultancy Contract 1-1
1.3 Present Feasibility Report 1-2
2 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY AND SATELLITE IMAGES (GIS)
2.1 General 2-1
2.2 Scope of Work 2-1
2.3 Instruments Used 2-1

2.3.1 Total Station TOPCON PT 3000 LN 2-1
2.3.2 E Trex Ground Positioning System (GPS) 2-2
2.3.3 Establishing Horizontal Control 2-2
2.4 Survey Maps 2-2
2.5 Traversing 2-3
2.6 Location of Survey Control Points 2-3
2.7 Establishment of Vertical Control 2-3
2.8 Topographical Survey 2-3
2.9 Satellite Images (GIS) 2-3

2.9.1 Satellite Image Acquisition 2-4
2.9.2 Images Preprocessing 2-4
2.9.3 Feature Digitization 2-5
2.9.4 Elevation Data Processing 2-5
2.9.5 Map Preparation and Printing 2-5
3 GEOLOGY, GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION

MATERIALS
3.0 Introduction 3-1
i
3.1 General Project Information 3-1
3.2 Previous Studies 3-1
3.3 Present Studies 3-1

3.3.1 Execution Arrangements 3-2
3.4 Topography and Geomorphology of the Project Area 3-2
3.5 Regional Geology and Tectonics 3-2
3.6 Field Investigations 3-3

3.6.1 Geological Mapping of the Project Area 3-4
3.6.2 Scanline Discontinuity Survey and Joint Data Collection 3-4
3.6.3 Exploratory Drilling 3-4
3.6.4 Geophysical Survey 3-4
3.6.5 Test Pits Excavation 3-5
3.6.6 Collection of Rock and Soil Samples 3-5
3.6.7 Laboratory Testing 3-5
3.7 Geology and Tectonics of the Project Area 3-5

3.7.1 Lithology 3-6
3.7.2 Tectonics 3-7
3.8 Geology of the Reservoir Area 3-8
3.9 Foundation Conditions at Weir Site and Appurtenant Structures 3-9

3.9.1 Weir Site 3-9
3.9.2 Alternative Weir Site 3-12
3.9.3 Conveyance Channel & Sand Trap Area 3-13
3.10 Design of Power Facilities 3-13

3.10.1 Power Tunnel Intake Portal 3-14
3.10.2 Design of Power Tunnel 3-15
3.10.3 Powerhouse & Tailrace Channel 3-29
3.11 Construction Materials 3-30

3.11.1 Information from the local (Mansehra) market 3-30
3.11.2 Concrete Aggregate Materials 3-30
3.11.3 Required Excavation 3-31
3.11.4 Potential Sources for Concrete Materials 3-31
3.11.5 Fine aggregate (Sand) Source 3-32
3.11.6 Sources of Cohesive Material 3-34
3.11.7 Other Materials (Marble and Quartzites) in Project Area 3-34
3.11.8 Cement 3-35
3.11.9 Water 3-35
3.11.10 Steel 3-36
3.12 Recommendations for Future Investigations 3-36
4 HYDROLOGY AND SEDIMENTATION
4A Pre-Flood Studies
4.1 General 4-1
4.2 Data Availability 4-1
ii
4.2.1 Available Reports and Studies 4-1

4.2.2 Hydro-Meteorological Data 4-2
4.2.3 River Flow Data 4-3
4.2.4 Rainfall Data 4-3
4.2.5 Isohyetal Maps 4-3
4.3 Temperatures 4-3
4.4 Sediment Data 4-4
4.5 Water Availability 4-4

4.5.1 General 4-4
4.5.2 Verification / Consistency of Data 4-4
4.5.3 Verification of Rainfall Data by DMC Analysis 4-4
4.5.4 Verification of Stream Flow Data By DMC Analysis 4-4
4.5.5 Rainfall and Stream Flow Data for the Project 4-5
4.5.6 Dry, Average and Wet Years 4-6
4.5.7 Drought Frequency Analysis 4-6
4.5.8 Determination of Ecological Flows 4-6
4.5.9 Flow Duration Curve 4-7
4.6 Flood Studies 4-7

4.6.1 General 4-7
4.6.2 Envelope Curve / Regional Approach 4-7
4.6.3 Hydro-Meteorological Approach 4-9
4.7 Sedimentation 4-10

4.7.1 General 4-10
4.7.2 Sediment Record 4-10
4.7.3 Sediment Rating Curve 4-11
4.7.4 Bed Load Measurements 4-12
4.7.5 Total Sediment Load 4-12
4B Post Flood Hydrology
4.8 General 4-14
4.9 Flood Study 4-15

4.9.1 First Report Flood (Pre-Flood) Study 4-15
4.9.2 Second Report Flood Study 4-16
4.9.3 Present Flood (Post-Flood) Study 4-17
4.10 Flow Study 4-20

4.10.1 Pre-Flood Flow Study 4-20
4.10.2 Present Flow Study 4-21
4.11 Conclusions 4-22
5 SEISMIC HAZARDS
5.1 General 5-1
5.2 Regional Tectonics 5-2
5.3 Active Faults in the Region 5-4

5.3.1 Hazara Thrust Fault System 5-4
5.3.2 Main Boundary Thrust (MBT) 5-4
iii
5.3.3 Main Frontal Thrust (MFT) / Riasi Fault 5-4

5.3.4 Kashmir Thrust (KT) 5-4
5.3.5 The Main Mantle Thrust (MMT) 5-5
5.4 Seismic Hazard Evaluation 5-6

5.4.1 Non-Instrumental (Historical) Data & Computation 5-6
5.4.2 Instrumental Data & Computations 5-7
5.5 Attenuation Relationship 5-8
5.6 Maximum Credible Earthquake 5-9
5.7 Operating Basis Earthquake 5-9
5.8 Return Period 5-10
5.9 Conclusions 5-11
6 PROJECT LAYOUT AND HYDRAULIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
6.1 Project Layout 6-1

6.1.1 General 6-1
6.1.2 Layout Studies 6-1
6.1.3 Layout Alternative A (Downstream of Existing Bridge) 6-6
6.1.4 Layout Alternative B (Upstream of Existing Bridge) 6-8
6.1.5 Cost Comparison of Alternative A And Alternative B 6-10
6.1.6 Conclusion 6-10
6.1.7 Description of Selected Layout Components 6-11
6.2 Hydraulic Design Considerations 6-12

6.2.1 General 6-12
6.2.2 Main Weir 6-13
6.2.3 Free Board 6-16
6.2.4 Bottom Outlets 6-17
6.2.5 Under Sluices 6-17
6.2.6 Intake Structure 6-17
6.2.7 Sandtrap 6-18
6.2.8 Headrace Power Tunnel 6-19
6.2.9 Surge Shaft 6-19
6.2.10 Penstock 6-20
6.2.11 Tailrace Channel 6-20
6.2.12 Tail Water Rating Curves 6-20
6.2.13 Diversion Arrangement 6-20
6.2.14 Head Losses in Power System 6-21
7 STRUCTURAL DESIGN STUDIES
7.1 Contents 7-1
7.2 Salient Structures and Components 7-1
7.3 Structures Design References 7-1
7.4 Structures General Design Criteria 7-2

7.4.1 Strength and Durability Requirements 7-2
7.4.2 Unit Weight of Materials 7-3
iv
7.4.3 Dead Loads 7-3

7.4.4 Live Loads on Categories of Structures (kN/m2) 7-3
7.4.5 Earth Pressure 7-3
7.4.6 Categories of Loads, Load Factors, Allowable Increase in Stresses 7-3
7.4.7 Required Strength (U) other than Power Tunnel 7-5
7.4.8 Required Strength for Power Tunnel 7-6
7.4.9 Strength Reduction Factors 7-6
7.4.10 Method of Design 7-6
7.4.11 Load Combinations 7-6
7.4.12 Uplift Forces 7-6
7.4.13 Size of Structures 7-7
7.4.14 Design Earthquake Factors 7-7
7.4.15 Design Response Spectrum 7-7
7.4.16 Factors of Safety (FOS) for Stability Analyses 7-7
7.4.17 Factors of Safety (FOS) in Flotation 7-8
7.4.18 Factor of Safety (FOS) in for Allowable Pressure on Foundation 7-8
7.4.19 Hydraulic Factor for Design of Reinforcement 7-8
7.4.20 Impact of Moving Vehicles on Structures 7-8
7.4.21 Buoyancy 7-9
7.4.22 Hydrodynamic Forces on Structures 7-9
7.4.23 Wind Loads 7-9
7.4.24 Pour Length of Concrete and Spacing of Construction Joints 7-9
7.4.25 Water-stops 7-9
7.4.26 Temperature Variation Effects 7-11
7.4.27 Shrinkage and Temperature Reinforcement 7-11
7.4.28 Design of Main Weir and Stilling Basin Structures 7-11
7.5 Intake Structure and Connecting Conduit 7-13

7.5.1 Intake Structure 7-13
7.5.2 Connecting Conduit, Wall Thickness 7-14
7.6 Conveyance Conduit 7-14

7.6.1 Upstream Conduit (between Main Weir and Sand Trap) 7-14
7.6.2 Downstream Conduit (between Power Intake and Tunnel Portal) 7-15
7.7 Sand Trap 7-15

7.7.1 Structure 7-15
7.7.2 Configuration 7-15
7.7.3 Spill Section 7-15
7.7.4 Construction and Contraction Joints 7-15
7.7.5 Exterior Walls 7-15
7.7.6 Center (Divide) Wall 7-16
7.7.7 Downstream (End) Wall 7-16
7.7.8 Structures Stability 7-16
7.8 Power Intake 7-16
7.9 Power Tunnel Portal 7-17

7.9.1 General 7-17
7.9.2 Structure Length 7-17
7.9.3 Rock Support System 7-17
7.9.4 Steel Ribs 7-17
7.9.5 Rock Bolts 7-18
7.9.6 Reinforced Concrete Design 7-18
7.10 Power Tunnel 7-19

7.10.1 General 7-19
7.10.2 External Hydrostatic Pressure 7-19
v
7.10.3 Rock Loads 7-19

7.10.4 Design Load Cases 7-20
7.10.5 Method of Design 7-20
7.10.6 Rock Anchors and Consolidation Grouting 7-20
7.10.7 Contact Grouting 7-21
7.10.8 Contraction Joints 7-21
7.10.9 Construction Joints 7-21
7.11 Surge Shaft 7-21
7.12 Steel Liner 7-23
7.13 Steel Penstock and Manifold 7-23

7.13.1 Penstock 7-23
7.13.2 Material 7-23
7.13.3 Design 7-24
7.13.4 Finishes 7-24
7.13.5 Manifold Block 7-24
7.14 Powerhouse 7-24

7.14.1 Features 7-24
7.14.2 Structural Configuration 7-25
7.15 Switchyard 7-26
7.16 Residences 7-26

7.16.1 Architectural Planning 7-26
7.16.2 Construction 7-27
7.16.3 Allied Facilities 7-27
8 MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT STUDIES AND POWER SIMULATION
A. Mechanical Equipment Studies
8.1 General 8-1
8.2 Codes and Standards 8-1
8.3 Turbines 8-2

8.3.1 Operating Water Levels and Heads 8-2
8.3.2 Design Flow and Rated Flow. 8-2
8.3.3 Turbine Selection 8-2
8.3.4 Turbine Main Components 8-5
8.3.5 Governor Type 8-5
8.3.6 Inlet Valves 8-6
8.3.7 Gate Equipment 8-7
8.3.8 Flushing Section Equipment 8-7
8.3.9 Cranes and Hoists for Power Plant 8-7
8.3.10 Miscellaneous Auxiliary Mechanical System 8-8
B. Power Simulation
8.4 Simulation of Annual Energy Generation 8-11
vi
8.5 Peak and Off Peak Hours Storage Volume 8-12
8.6 Reservoir Operation 8-12
9 ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT STUDIES
9.1 General 9-1
9.2 Major Equipments 9-1
9.3 Reference 9-2

9.3.1 Codes and Standards 9-2
9.4 General Electrical Design Criteria 9-2

9.4.1 Voltage Consideration 9-2
9.4.2 DC Source Requirements for Controls 9-3
9.4.3 AC Source Requirements for Unit and Station Services 9-3
9.4.4 Protection and Coordination Philosophy 9-3
9.4.5 Electrical Equipment Location 9-3
9.5 Electrical Generators 9-4

9.5.1 General Considerations 9-4
9.5.2 Generator Design Particulars 9-4
9.5.3 Types and Rating 9-4
9.5.4 Generator Output 9-5
9.5.5 Cooling System of Generators 9-5
9.6 Excitation and Voltage Regulation System 9-5

9.6.1 Excitation System 9-5
9.6.2 Excitation Transformer 9-6
9.6.3 Voltage Regulation 9-6
9.7 Main Step-Up Transformer 9-7

9.7.1 Main Data for Transformers 9-7
9.7.2 Overload Requirements 9-7
9.7.3 Short Circuit Capability 9-7
9.7.4 Buchholz Relay 9-8
9.7.5 Cooling System and Requirement 9-8
9.8 Auxiliary Systems 9-8

9.8.1 Auxiliary Station Transformer 9-8
9.8.2 Station Colony Transformer 9-9
9.8.3 11 KV (Medium Voltage) Supply System 9-9
9.8.4 11 KV Circuit Breakers 9-9
9.8.5 Low Voltage AC Supply 9-10
9.8.6 Emergency Diesel Generator Set 9-10
9.8.7 DC Supply and UPS System 9-10
9.8.8 Power Supply to Gates at the Weir 9-11
9.8.9 Lighting and Small Power 9-11
9.9 Control And Protection Systems 9-12

9.9.1 Control System 9-12
9.9.2 Protection System 9-13
9.10 Cables 9-15

9.10.1 Design for Cables 9-15
vii
9.10.2 Medium Voltage Power Cables 9-16

9.10.3 Low Voltage Power Cables (600 V and below) 9-16
9.10.4 Control Cables 9-16
9.10.5 Instrumentation Cables 9-16
9.10.6 Lighting Cables 9-17
9.11 Grounding System 9-17

9.11.1 System Description 9-17
9.12 132 KV Switchgear 9-18

9.12.1 Selection of Switchgear Arrangement 9-18
9.12.3 Switchyard Layout Arrangement 9-19
9.12.4 Design Criteria 9-19
9.12.5 132 kV Circuit Breakers 9-19
9.13 Telecommunication 9-20

9.13.1 Internal Communication 9-20
9.13.2 External Communication 9-20
9.14 Transmission Line and Interconnections 9-20

9.14.1 Transmission Line 9-20
9.14.2 Interconnection with National Grid System 9-22
10 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT (IEE &SIA)
10.1 General 10-1
10.2 Need for the Environmental Study 10-1
10.3 Approach Adopted for the Study 10-2
10.4 Scope of the IEE Study 10-2
10.5 Environmental Base Line Condition 10-2

10.5.1 Delineation of the Study Area 10-3
10.5.2 Land Resources 10-3
10.5.3 Water Resources 10-4
10.5.4 Biological Resources 10-4
10.5.5 Climate 10-5
10.5.6 Ambient Air Quality 10-6
10.5.7 Ambient Noise Quality 10-6
10.6 Public Consultation 10-10

10.6.1 Major Development Discussed during Scoping Session 10-10
10.6.2 Perception of Respondents about the Project 10-10
10.6.3 Main Concern of the Stakeholders 10-11
10.6.4 Addressal of Stakeholders Concern 10-11
10.7 Potential Impacts and Mitigations 10-12

10.7.1 Delineation of Projects Area of Influences 10-12
viii
10.7.2 Project Impact Matrix 10-13
A. Environmental Impacts and Mitigations 10-13
10.7.3 Land Resources 10-13

10.7.4 Water Resources 10-16
10.7.5 Ambient Air Quality 10-19
10.7.6 Noise 10-21
10.7.7 Biological Environment 10-21
B. Social Impacts, Mitigations and Resettlement 10-24
10.8 Alternative Considered 10-30

10.8.1 No Action 10-30
10.8.2 Alternative Resources of Power Generation 10-30
10.8.3 Project Design / Location Alternative 10-31
10.9 Environmental Management Plan and Institutional Requirement 10-31

10.9.1 Environmental Monitoring Plan 10-32
10.10 Abbreviated Resettlement Plan (ARP) 10-33

10.10.1 General 10-33
10.10.2 Main Objective of Abbreviated Resettlement 10-33
10.10.3 Potential Effects of the Project 10-33
10.10.4 Land Acquisition Act (1984) and Practice in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 10-34
10.10.5 Entitlement and Eligibility 10-35
10.10.6 Institutional Responsibilities and Monitoring Arrangements 10-36
10.10.7 Monitoring and Evaluation 10-38
10.11 Environmental and Resettlement Cost 10-39

10.11.1 Compensation for Trees plus Afforestation Cost 10-39
10.11.2 Environmental Monitoring Cost 10-39
10.11.3 Resettlement Cost Estimates 10-40
10.12 Conclusions and Recommendations 10-40

10.12.1 Conclusions 10-40
10.12.2 Recommendations 10-41
11 CONSTRUCTION PLANNING AND COST ESTIMATE
11.1 Construction Planning 11-1

11.1.1 General 11-1
11.1.2 Land Acquisition 11-1
11.1.3 Mobilization and Preparatory Works 11-2
11.1.4 Exploration for Borrow Areas and Construction Materials 11-2
11.1.5 Coffer Dams and Care of Water 11-2
11.1.6 Weir and Intake Structure Works 11-3
11.1.7 Sand Trap 11-3
11.1.8 Power Tunnel 11-3
ix
11.1.9 Surge Shaft 11-3

11.1.10 Penstock 11-3
11.1.11 Powerhouse 11-4
11.1.12 Tailrace 11-4
11.1.13 Installation of E&M Equipment 11-4
11.1.14 Transmission Line 11-4
11.1.15 Testing and Commissioning 11-5
11.2 Cost Estimate 11-5

11.2.1 General 11-5
11.2.2 Recapitulation of the Project Base Cost 11-5
11.2.3 Price Level and Rate of Exchange 11-6
11.2.4 Scope of the Cost Estimates 11-6
11.2.5 Project Base Cost Components 11-6
11.2.6 Currency Breakdown 11-7
11.2.7 Basic Assumptions and Limitations 11-7
11.2.8 Development of Cost Estimate for Civil Work 11-8
11.2.9 Development of Cost Estimate for Permanent Equipment 11-10
11.2.10 Development of Cost Estimate for the Project Indirect Cost 11-11
11.2.11 Detail Design and Tender Documents 11-12
11.2.12 Client Expenses 11-12
11.2.13 Engineering and Project Management Cost 11-12
11.2.14 Duties and Taxes 11-12
11.2.15 Physical Contingency, IDC and Price Escalation 11-13
11.2.16 Cash Flow 11-13
11.2.17 Cost Estimate 11-13
12 ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL EVALUATIONS
12.1 Economic Analysis 12-1

12.1.1 General 12-1
12.1.2 Methodology for the Economic Analysis 12-1
12.1.3 Thermal Power Plant Parameters 12-1
12.1.4 Assumptions 12-1
12.1.5 Results of Economic Analysis 12-2
12.1.6 Sensitivity Analysis 12-3
12.1.7 Certified Emission Reduction (CER) 12-3
12.2 Financial Analysis 12-4

12.2.1 Introduction 12-4
12.2.2 Methodology 12-4
12.2.3 Financial Structure of the Project 12-6
12.2.4 Terms of Loan 12-6
12.2.5 Annual Recurring Expenditure 12-7
12.2.6 Assumptions for the Financial Analysis 12-7
12.2.7 Unit Costs 12-8
12.2.8 Estimated Revenues 12-9
12.2.9 Payback Period 12-9
12.2.10 Profit & Loss Statement 12-9
12.2.11 Benefits of the Project 12-9
13 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
x
Jabori Hydropower Project Final Feasibility Report List of Tables
DRAFT FEASIBILITY REPORT

LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Description
S-1 Salient Features
2.1 Direct Co-ordinate from Total Station

2.2 Detailed Topographic Survey
3.1 Details of Exploratory Drilling

3.2 Exploratory Drilling-Insitu Testing
3.3 Seismic Refraction Profiles
3.4 Testpit Excavation at Site
3.5.1 Petrographic Analysis
3.5.2 Geotechnical Investigation Results of Rock and Rock Core Samples
3.5.3 Geotechnical Investigation Results of Soil Samples
3.5.4 Chemical Analysis of Water Samples
3.5.5 Geotechnical Investigation Results for Construction Material
3.5.6 Grain Size Analysis
4-A Pre-Flood Studies

4.1 Hydro-meteorological Parameters
4.2 Hydro-meteorological Data for 3 HPP (SHYDO)
4.3 Observed Mean Monthly Flows for Siran River at Phulra (1969-2006)
4.4 Monthly Precipitation Data of Jabbar (mm)
4.5 Monthly Precipitation Data of Oghi (mm)
4.6 Air Temperature at Oghi (C)
4.7 Observed Mean Monthly Flows for Siran River at Jabori (2005-2008)
4.8 Calculated Mean Monthly Net Flows for Siran River at Jabori Weir Site
(1969-2008)
4.9 Calculated Mean Monthly Flows for Siran River at Power House Location
(1969-2008)
4.10 Dry, Average and Wet Years Analysis
4.11 Percent Deviation from Mean Annual Flows
4.12 Maximum Annual Oneday Rainfall at Jabbar
4.13 Estimated Rainfall at Jabbar for Jabori HPP
4.14 Flood Estimation for Jabori HPP
4.15 Available Sediment Data Of Upper Indus River Catchment SWHP
Publication No: 57: Sediment Appraisal Of Pakistan 1960-1998
4.16 Mean Monthly and Annual Suspended Load of Siran River at Phulra (1969 -
2006)
4.17 Mean Monthly and Annual Suspended Load of Siran River at Jabori (1969 -
2006)
4.18 Calculated Mean Monthly and Annual Suspended Load of Siran River at
Jabori (2005 - 2008)
xi
4.19 Comparison of Hydro-meteorological Parameters in Northern Areas of

Pakistan
4.20 Comparison of Mean Monthly Suspended Load of Siran River at Jabori
4.21 Comparison of Hydro-meteorological Parameters
4.22 Bedload Estimation for Jabori HPP
4-B Post-Flood Hydrology

4.23 Flood Estimation For Jabori HPP
4.24 Calculated Mean Monthly Net Flows for Siran River at Jabori HPP Weir Site
(1969-2008)
4.25 Calculated Mean Monthly Net Flows for Siran River at Jabori HPP
Powerhouse Site (1969-2008)
5.1 Intensity Values and Acceleration Relationship

5.2 PGA Values for Magnitude 6, 7 & 7.6 Earthquake with Hypocenter Depth as
15 & 25 kilometers
5.3 Evaluation of PGA in Pakistan using different Formulae
5.4 Earthquake Distribution using USGS Database around Jabori
5.5 ICOLD Recommendations on Return Period
6.1 Optimization of Design Discharge
8.1 Alternatives for Turbines Selection
10.1a Detail of Flora in the District

10.1b Detail of Flora in Project Area
10.2 a List of Fauna in the District
10.2 b Detail of Fauna in Project Area
10.3 Temperature and Rainfall Data for the Period 1961-90
10.4 Maximum & Minimum Annual One day Rainfall at Jabbar
10.5 Land Required by the Project Structures
10.6 Age Composition
10.7 Gender Composition
10.8 Detail of Occupations in the Project Area
10.9 Household Assets
10.10 Livestock in Households
10.11 Detail of Land Ownership
10.12 Land and Land Use
10.13 Crops Cultivated in Project Area
10.14 Detail of Social Amenities in Project Area
10.15 Perception of Respondents on Project Impacts
10.16 Project Impact Matrix
10.17 Estimated Mean Monthly Flows-1969 to 2008 (m3/sec)
10.18 WHO Guideline Values for Community Noise in Specific Environments
10.19 Relative Sound Levels
10.20 Detail of Residential Unit
10.21 Size classification of Dam
10.22 Recommended safety Standard
10.23 Environmental Management Plan
10.24 Environmental Monitoring Plan
10.25 Project Impacts on Permanent Land Acquisition in Jabori Town
10.26 Project Impacts on Temporary Land Acquisition
10.27 Detail of Affected Land
10.28 Details of Affected Trees
10.29 Record of Scoping Sessions
10.30 Main Differences between LAA and ADB Involuntary Resettlement
Guidelines
10.31 Resettlement Entitlement Matrix
xii
10.32 General Time Frame for Land Acquisition

10.33 Environmental cost
10.34 Age Composition
10.35 Gender Composition
10.36 Detail of Occupations in the Project Area
10.37 Household Assets
10.38 Livestock in Households
10.39 Detail of Land Ownership
10.40 Land and Land Use (Kanals)
10.41 Detail of Social Amenities
10.42 Perception of respondents on Project Impacts
10.43 Record of Scoping Sessions
10.44 Land Required by the Project Structures
10.45 Detail of Affected Land
10.46 Resettlement Cost with Unit Price
10.47 Project Impacts on Permanent Land Acquisition in Jabori Town
10.48 Project Impacts on Temporary Land Acquisition
10.49 Details of Affected Trees
10.50 Afforestation Cost
11.1 Summary of Cost Estimate

11.2 Cost Estimate
12.1 Alternative Thermal Power Plant Assumptions and Cost Summary

12.2 Summary of Cost Estimate
12.3 Economic Comparison Indicators
12.4 Economic Analysis Using Simple Cycle Gas Turbine Plant as Thermal
Equivalent
12.5 Economic Analysis Using Combined Cycle Plant as Thermal Equivalent
12.6 Economic Analysis Using Diesel Plant as Thermal Equivalent
12.7 Year Wise Breakup of Summary of Project Cost Estimates
12.8 Financial Analysis Hydro Power Project Jabori
12.9 Cost Per KWh and KW
12.10 Profit & Loss Statement
xiii
Jabori Hydropower Project Final Feasibility Report List of Figures
FINAL FEASIBILITY REPORT

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Description Page No
1.1 Location Plan
2.1 Topographic Survey Weir Site Area

2.2 Topographic Survey Powerhouse Area
2.3 Satellite Image
2.4 Topographic Map Developed from SRTM Data
3.1 Local Area Geological Map

3.2 Local Area Geological Map
3.3 Investigation Plan
3.4 Geological Map of Project Area
3.5 Geological Plan of Reservoir Area
3.6 Geological Map of Weir Site
3.7 Weir Site Geological Sections A-A and B-B
3.8 Geological Map and Section C-C of Alternative Weir Site
3.9 Geological Plan and Section (D-D) of Conveyance Channel and Sandtrap
3.10 Geological Plan of Power Tunnel Area
3.11 Geological Section Along Power Tunnel Alternate-A (Options 1&2)
3.11-A Geological Section Along Selected Power Tunnel
3.12 Geological Section Along Power Tunnel Alternate-B (Options 1&2)
3.13 Geological Map of Powerhouse Area
3.14 Geological Section (E-E) of Powerhouse
4-A Pre-Flood Studies

4.1 Catchment Area
4.2 Pakistan Annual Normal Isohyetal Map
4.3 Double Mass Curve for Rainfall Data (1974-2004)
4.4 Double Mass Curve for Rainfall Data (1963-2006)
4.5 Double Mass Curve for Discharge Data (1969-2006)
4.6 Observed Mean Monthly Flows for Siran River at Jabori (2005-2008)
4.7 Comparison for Jabori HPP (1974-2004)
4.8 Correlation of Observed Mean Monthly Discharges
4.9 Calculated Mean Monthly Flows at Weir Site (1969-2008)
4.10 Calculated Mean Monthly Flows at Powerhouse Site (1969-2008)
4.11 Mean Annual Net Flows at Siran River at Weir Site (1969-2008)
4.12 Mean Annual Net Flows at Siran River at Powerhouse Site (1969-2008)
4.13 Percent Deviation from the Mean Annual Flows
xiv
4.14 Flow Duration Curve Based on Net Daily Flows Jabori HPP (1969-2008)
4.15 Rainfall Frequency Curve Jabori HPP
4.16 HEC-HMS Simulation of 1992- Flood
4.17 100 Year Return Period Flood for Jabori HPP
4.18 Suspending Sediment Rating Curve of Siran River at Phulra (1961-2006)
4.19 Mean Monthly Distribution of Total Sediment Load at Proposed Jabori Dam
Site
4-B Post-Flood Hydrology

4.20 Correlation of Observed Mean Monthly Discharges
4.21 Comparison between Generated and Observed Mean Monthly Flows
4.22 Calculated Mean Monthly Net Flows at Weir Site (1969-2008)
4.23 Calculated Mean Monthly Net Flows at Powerhouse Site (1969-2008)
4.24 Mean Annual Net Flows at Weir Site (1969-2008)
4.25 Mean Annual Net Flows at Powerhouse Site (1969-2008)
4.26 Flow Duration Curve Based on Net Daily Flows- Jabori HPP (1969-2008)
5.1 Location Map of Koto, Karora and Jabori HPP Sites, KP Pakistan
5.2 Basin Architecture of Pakistan
5.3 The Indian Plate Colliding with Eurasian Plate and Tectonic Map of Pakistan
(after Geological Survey of Pakistan)
5.4 Tectonic Map of Northern Pakistan
5.5 Northern Pakistan Earthquake of 2005 with Regional Seismicity and Tectonic
Elements of Pakistan (after USGS)
5.6 Regional Stress Map of East Asia
5.7 Intensity Map of Kashmir Earthquake 2005
5.8 Epicenters of Earthquakes Around 5 kms of Jabori Hydropower Plant
5.9 Spatial Distribution of the Epicenters of Earthquakes around Jabori
Hydropower Plant, KP, Pakistan Prior to October 8, 2005
5.10 Spatial Distribution of the Epicenters of all Earthquakes around Jabori
Hydropower Plant, KP, Pakistan
5.11 Distance Vs Number of Earthquakes Graphs at Jabori HPP
5.12 Hypocenters Depth on a N-S Section through Jabori HPP site with a
Distance of 50 Kms from the Site
5.13 Spectral Acceleration Due to Operational Basis Earthquake at Jabori, KP
5.14 Number of Earthquakes and Respective Magnitude within 50 Kms of Jabori
Area
6.1 Weir Alternatives

6.2 Project Layout Plan Alternative-A P.H. Downstream of Existing Bridge
6.2 (A) L-Section of Power Tunnel Alterative-A Option 1&2
6.3 Project Layout Plan Alternative-B, P.H. Upstream of Existing Bridge
6.3 (A) L-Section of Power Tunnel Alternative B, Option 1&2
6.4 Feasibility Study Project Selected Layout Plan
6.5 L-Section and Cross X-Section of Power Tunnel
6.6 Area-Capacity-Elevation Curves
6.7 Power Intake Details
xv
6.8 Weir Elevation Upstream View

6.9 Overflow Weir Section B-B
6.10 Weir Elevation Downstream View
6.11 Overflow Weir Section A-A
6.12 Non-Overflow Weir Section C-C
6.13 Bottom Outlets (4@3x3) Details
6.14 Undersluices Outlets (3@1.5 x 2) Details
6.15 Intake Structure Details (Reservoir)
6.16 Sand Trap
6.17 Power Intake Details (D/s of Sedimentation Basin)
6.18 Tailwater Rating Curve at Weir Site
6.19 Tailwater Rating Curve at Powerhouse Site
6.20 1st Stage Diversion Arrangement
6.21 2nd Stage Diversion Arrangement
7.1 Conveyance Conduit

7.2 Tunnel Portal, Power Tunnel
7.3 Powerhouse Plan and Sections
7.11 Surge Shaft Structure Details
8.1 Application Diagram for Types of Hydraulic Turbines

8.2 Range of Application for Turbine Type
8.3 Efficiency curve of Jabori HPP Turbine with Flow Capacity 3.14m3 / s
8.4 Powerhouse Plan and Section
9.1 Unit Single Line Diagram

9.2 Auxiliary Supply System
9.3 Protection Scheme
9.4 DC Supply System
9.5 Proposed 132 KV Transmission Line Route Plan
10.1 Land Required for Weir Site

10.2 Land Required for Powerhouse Site
10.3 Foot Print of Jabori HPP
11.1 Overall Implementation Programme Including Construction Schedule
12.1 Sensitivity Analysis - Response to EIRR (%) Under Different Scenarios
xvi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Jabori Hydropower Project Final Feasibility Report Executive Summary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
S1. Introduction
Three hydropower projects viz: 18 MW Koto HPP on Panjkora River in Lower Dir District, 8
MW Jabori HPP on Siran River in Mansehra District, and 7.5 MW Karora HPP on Khan
Khwar in Shangla District were part of the potential schemes identified by SHYDO GTZ in
1992 during their studies for identification of potential hydropower projects in Northern areas
of Pakistan. Figure-S.1, attached herewith, shows the location of the three hydropower
projects.
Associated Consulting Engineers ACE (Pvt.) Ltd. were assigned to conduct the Feasibility
studies for the three hydropower projects.
Present Feasibility Report for Jabori Hydropower Project is preceded by Inception,

Prefeasibility and Draft Feasibility Reports submitted earlier. All the relevant studies and
investigations described in the Term of Reference of the Consultancy Contract are also
included in the Report.
According to optimization studies, the project has been designed for 30% dependable river
discharges and has been checked against standard practices and guidelines published by
PPIB in its Policy Framework and Package of Incentives for Private Sector Hydel Power
Generation Projects in Pakistan. Selection of the number and sizes of power generation
units and other features has been done through comparative studies and the most suitable
option has been selected.
Security situation in the study area remained precarious for quite some time and the field
investigations and studies were affected due to this reason. Fortunately, it was possible to
conduct all the field investigations and surveys including Refraction Seismic Survey using
explosives, in Jabori Project area.
While the work on Final Feasibility Report and PC-I of Jabori HPP was in final stage of
completion / submission the devastating floods of July-August 2010 were witnessed. The
event was so alarming that SHYDO and ACE found it necessary to review the design of
three hydropower projects in the light of these floods. Accordingly a study related to the
flood of 2010 was conducted and a separate report was prepared to record the effects of
this catastrophic flood phenomenon. Hydrological studies have now been revised after
including the data regarding flood of year 2010 and additional hydro-meteorological data
that was not available at the time when Draft Feasibility Report was prepared and
submitted. Design of Jabori HPP has been revised to cater for the new flood estimates and
all the relevant sections of the Report have been modified accordingly.
S2. Topographic Survey and Satellite Images (GIS)
Detailed topographic maps of the project area have been prepared through comprehensive
surveys carried out using total station TOPCON PT 3000 LN and E Trex Global Positioning
System (GPS). The field data was computer-processed and computer-aided mapping was
carried out on selected scales to suit the requirements.
S-1
Maps for surrounding areas of the project have been prepared by using cutting edge
technologies of remote sensing and GIS. Latest available high resolution satellite images
were procured to digitize the land features while SRTM elevation data has been utilized to
trace contours. Actual survey points collected during field topographic survey were also
embedded into it to improve the map quality. Latest cartographic environment was then
utilized to prepare the GIS maps.
S3. Geology, Geotechnical Engineering and Construction Material
The geological and geotechnical studies and investigations have been carried out for all
significant components of the Project. These include the regional and local area geological
and tectonic set up of the Project area, geological mapping, scan line discontinuity survey,
execution of the drilling works (08 holes with 180 m total depth), geophysical survey through
seismic refraction profiling (15 profiles with 2870 m length) and test pit excavation etc.
Studies and investigations have also been carried out in the Project area as well as in the
near vicinity for potential sources of construction materials.
The studies have indicated that the Jabori Project (Mansehra) is situated in the geological
and tectonic regime of Northern Pakistan, characterized by subduction of Indian shield
under the Eurasian plate. The Main Karakoram Fault (MKF) marks the boundary of
Eurasian plate in the North while the Main Mantle Thrust (MMT) marks the boundary of
Indian Plate in the south. In between these two mega features the Kohistan Island Arc (KIA)
is situated. The seismo - tectonic set up of the region has given rise to various other
tectonic features in the Indian plate like the MCT, MBT, HFT and the recently (2005)
developed rupture along the Balakot Bagh Fault which has been considered as the critical
Fault for the Project site.
The Project area is situated in the domain of metamorphic rocks which have been
frequently intruded by the granitic igneous mass. The areas geology indicates that the
metamorphic rocks of quartz mica schist of medium to high grade dominate the area. The
quartzite and marbles are present at places as alternating beds with quartz mica schist. At
places minor injected bodies of quartzo - feldspathic veins and pegmatites are also present
in the area.
The 13 m high weir structure shall be located near Jabori town. The rock (quartz mica
schist) is exposed on the left side of the weir, while on the right bank the weir shall be tied in
the terrace material of silty, clayey gravels and boulders. The conveyance channel from
weir to the intake tunnel portal, including the sand trap shall also be located in similar
terrace material. The reservoir area shall extend to less than one kilometer from the weir
and is confined by the high rising hill faces on both the banks. Therefore, no problem
regarding the leakage from the rims is envisaged. However, on the right bank just upstream
of the weir, nallah debris flows which needs corrective measures.
The power tunnel with a length of 1060 m and an excavated diameter of 3.1m shall pass
through a 350 m high ridge, composed dominantly of metamorphic rocks. However, in the
middle part of the tunnel the quartzite and marble beds shall dominate with subordinate
quartz mica schists. The stability analysis and the support system has been assessed along
the tunnel route using the RSR, RMR and Q- Barton systems. All these systems have
S-2
indicated that the rock mass along most parts of the tunnel shall be of Fair to Poor type,
with some parts of Good quality rock mass. Also, very poor rock conditions have been
assessed for the areas where it is anticipated that fault and shear zones shall be
encountered along the tunnel. Stability measures shall be required all along the tunnel
mainly due to presence of quartz mica schist in dominating or as subordinate rock. These
measures shall include shotcreting in various thicknesses, rock bolting and provision of
steel ribs at critical positions. The tunnel shall be concrete lined throughout its length. The
power house and tail race at the end of the power tunnel shall be placed on rock in general,
and some excavation in terrace material and weathered rock may be required to reach the
foundation level.
The availability of construction materials for the Project has also been studied. These
studies indicate that suitable materials for concrete aggregate shall not be available at or
near the site and shall have to be procured from outside the Project area. The coarse
aggregate from nearest source of Oghi (Mansehra), Abbottabad or Margala Hills of
Hasanabdal have been recommended. The sand sources from Lawrancepur (Hasanabdal)
or from near Thakot (Indus river) have been recommended. Required quantities of cement
shall have to be procured from cement factories in Hasanabdal or Islamabad. The
promising sources of cohesive soils are available near the reservoir area within a distance
of 15 km from the site.
S4. Hydrology & Sedimentation
4A Pre-flood Studies:
SHYDO is measuring daily stream flows and suspended sediment load since March, 2005
for Siran River at Jabori where the catchment area is 238 km2. Flows are also measured by
SWHP of WAPDA at a gauging station of Siran River at Phulra since 1969.
In order to derive long-term stream flows at Jabori Weir and Powerhouse sites, the river
discharge data of SHYDO has been correlated with SWHP, (WAPDA) records of Siran river
discharges at Phulra. The correlation has been used to generate daily river discharges at
Jabori and a Flow Duration Curve has been evolved with the help of this data after
deducting ecological flows. Ecological flows have been estimated by using the formula
developed by CEMAGREF, a public institute of France. This formula is also recommended
by the International Association of Small Hydropower. Flows obtained from the curve are
given hereunder:
30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

Time Exceeded 10% 20%
Flow (m3/s) 8.2 7.09 6.28 5.66 5.12 4.68 4.34 4.00 3.63
Flood Studies
The catchment area of Siran River at Jabori weir and powerhouse site estimated by the
Consultants using 1:50,000 Survey of Pakistan (SOP) maps, is 236 km2 and 273 km2 for
weir and power house locations respectively.
S-3
The following two methods for flood studies are used for estimation of floods:
1. Envelope Curve / Regional Approach
2. The Hydro-meteorological Approach (USBR)
Details of the two approaches are described in the relevant sections of this report. The
results are given in the following table:
Flood Estimation for Jabori HPP
Floods Estimated From

Return Period Hydro-meteorological Approach
Sr.No. Regional Approach
HEC-HMS
(Years) m3/s m3/s
1 2 79.5
2 5 138.9 300.69
3 10 182.4 351.31
4 20 226.4
5 25 240.6
6 50 285.6
7 75 312.1
8 100 331.1 621.40
9 200 332.8
10 500 385.8
11 1000 487.1 835.19
12 10000 1047.59
Sediment Studies
Long-term data for sedimentation is not available at the project site. SHYDO is collecting
data at Jabori gauge since Dec. 2005. However, sediment data of Siran River at Phulra is
collected by WAPDA since 1968. Samples of suspended sediment were also collected by
the consultants during the year 2009. These samples were analyzed by International
Sediment Research Institute of Pakistan.
Geometeorological parameters of Jabori are not found comparable with Phulra; hence the
suspended sediment for Jabori is estimated by using data recorded by SHYDO. This
estimate compares well with the values adopted in Daral Khwar Hydropower project.
Bed load measurements are not carried out on regular basis by any agency or department.
In such circumstances, the estimated values in Daral Khwar Hydropower project have been
converted for Jabori after giving proper weightage to varying parameters.
S-4
Total sediment load thus estimated at proposed Jabori weir has been computed as shown
below:
S/No. Description Sediment Load

(Million Tons)
1. Mean Annual Suspended Sediment Load 0.07
2. Unmeasured Annual Bed Load 0.14
3. Total Annual Load 0.21
4B Post-Food Hydrology:
Flood studies for the Jabori hydropower project given in the Draft Feasibility Report (First
Report) and Flood 2010 Report (Second Report) have been revised considering 2010 flood
scenario and longer flow data record.
Floods for the Jabori weir site were computed by using following three approaches.
(1) Hydro-meteorological Approach
(2) GTZ Regional Analysis Approach
(3) Local Regional Analysis Approach
As the highest one day rainfall (187 mm on 29th July, 2010) at Saidu Sharif and highest river
discharge in 2010 at the weir site were available in the Second Report, hence flood study
for the Jabori hydropower project was revised considering this information. One additional
step in this study was the verification of 2010 flood by USBR Method. By tuning the
infiltration calibrating parameter of the USBR Model, the method results were brought closer
to the observed flood passed at the site on 29th July, 2010. This additional verification of the
Model has given a great confidence in computing the other values of floods corresponding
to various return periods.
Results of the GTZ Regional Analysis were same as same equations were used for the
assessment of flood magnitudes corresponding to various return periods.
Local Regional Analysis equations were developed by the Consultants using 5 stream
gauging stations flood data, i.e. Phulra, Besham Qila, Gorband, Kalam and Chakdara.
Stream gauging stations used for the development of regional equations have more
similarity with the hydro-meteorological characteristics of the Jabori watershed. And hence
Local Regional Analysis Approach is more reliable for the study area as compared to GTZ
Regional Analysis Approach.
For the estimation of floods at the site, Hydro-meteorological Approach has been proved to
be the most reliable as Curve Number was estimated on the basis of calibrating the HEC-
HMS Model and its result was validated for the 2010 flood, hence this approach is
recommended for the estimation of floods against medium and higher return periods for the
Jabori weir site. Using this approach, 100, 1000 and 10,000 years return period floods were
estimated as 600, 971 and 1093 m3/s, respectively.
S-5
For lower return periods, results of the Local Regional Analysis Approach are
recommended for the Jabori HPP site being on higher side. Using this approach, 05 and 10
years return period floods were estimated as 238 and 319 m3/s, respectively.
Results of the flood frequency analysis reveal that the flood passed at the proposed Jabori
hydropower project location was having a recurrence interval of about 62 years.
Floods presented in the First Report are slightly lower than the presently computed flood
values. This change has appeared due to giving due considerations to 2010 flood
magnitude which was estimated by using past flood mark approach in the Second Report.
Although the main objective of the present review was to check the design floods adopted in
the First Report after giving due consideration to the floods of 2010 but during the course of
studies, it was found desirable to review the river discharges computed earlier in the First
Report, as well.
Mean Annual Flows, Mean Annual Ecological Flows and Mean Annual Net Flows for the
proposed Jabori weir site were estimated as 5.58 m3/s, 0.132 m3/s and 5.45 m3/s,
respectively. These have been reviewed using a different regression model and including
additional data.
For the present flow study, flow data of Phulra stream gauging station for years 2007-2008
was collected from SWHP, WAPDA. Flows at the weir site were generated by developing
correlation between mean monthly flows of Jabori for the 03 years (2006-2008) and mean
monthly flows of Phulra stream gauging stations for the same 03 years (2006-2008). Flow
data of 2005 was not used in this study as it was not available for first three months, i.e.
January to March, 2005. The developed scatter diagram and best fitted curve has shown
good correlation between flows of Jabori and Phulra stream gauging stations as compared
to results shown in the First Report. Using the flow data of Phulra, flow data for Jabori weir
site was generated for 37 years (1969-2005), as observed data was available completely for
03 years (2006-2008).
Mean Annual Net Flows presented in the First Report are slightly higher than the presently
computed Mean Annual Net Flows, i.e. 5.70 and 5.45 m3/s, respectively. It is due to using a
different regression model for the estimation of flows developed on the basis of concurrent
flow data records on both stations. Moreover, years 2007 and 2008 were relatively low flow
years for Phulra which were added for the present study. Thus the revised flows compare
well with the already adopted values and the slight difference in the mean annual net flows
does not warrant any change in the hydropower parameters of the Project.
S5. Seismic Hazards
Jabori hydropower plant site is located in a zone which is seismically active due to the
continuing northward drifting of the Indian plate and its subduction under the Eurasian plate.
This tectonic activity has resulted in the production of a crustal accretion wedge. The
Himalayan range. The intercontinental collision has further resulted in intense deformation
with complex folding involving strike-slip and thrust faulting. This tectonic process is the
origin of the seismicity along the Himalayas and in particular where Northern Pakistan is
S-6
located. The major regional faults related to the intercontinental collision, and considered to
be active and capable of generating earthquakes, include Main Karakorum Fault (MKF),
Main Mantle Thrust (MMT), Panjal Thrust, Main Boundary Thrust (MBT), Main Frontal
Thrust (MFT) and Salt Range Thrust. Jabori Hydropower plant is located in the vicinity of
Main Boundary Thrust (MBT), Main Frontal Thrust (Kashmir Thrust) and Main Mantle Thrust
(MMT).
Seismic Hazard Evaluation, based on available data / literature regarding regional geology,
tectonics, non-instrumental and instrumental seismicity, has been carried out for Jabori
Power Project by including some 900 events in the study.
The Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis (DSHA) has revealed that for Jabori
Hydropower Plant, Kashmir Thrust could be the critical fault, capable of generating a
magnitude 7.6 MW Earthquake (equivalent to October 8, 2005 Kashmir Earthquake).
Maximum Credible Earthquake in the region is thus calculated to be of the order of 0.58g
with an epicenter 25 kms from the site.
Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) acceleration is commonly assumed to be half of MCE

value. However, the available seismic data has been analyzed to evaluate Peak Ground
acceleration (PGA) more accurately. The calculated value of Peak Ground acceleration for
Jabori Hydropower plant site comes to 0.17g. After applying the recommended safety
factor, the OBE is calculated to be 0.22g. As per classification of ICOLD Bulletin 72 (1989)
"Selecting Seismic Parameters for Large Dams", the PGA value at Jabori HPP site falls in
Hazard Class II (Moderate).
The return period as per Gutenberg Richter Law for a 7.6 magnitude earthquake is
calculated to be of the order of 400 years and for a magnitude 7 earthquake is 74 years for
Jabori HPP site.
S6. Project Layout and Hydraulic Design Considerations
Project Layout
Originally, this scheme was proposed by GTZ who estimated its power potential as 8 MW.
GTZ had proposed a low height weir (6m) across Siran River, a power tunnel 4m diameter
and powerhouse with two generation units near village Granthali.
In planning various layouts, recommendations of the GTZ report were also used as
guidelines. Several layouts were studied for this project. Two weir axes were selected; Axis-
1 is located about 1 km upstream of village Jabori while Axis-2 is located about 100 m
upstream of weir Axis-1. Complete layouts were marked and their costs were estimated.
Weir Axis-2 was dropped being more expensive. There were two alternatives for
powerhouse location. The alternatives are as follows:
Alternative A with weir Axis-1 and with powerhouse location downstream of existing bridge.
Alternative B with weir Axis-1 and location of powerhouse upstream of existing bridge.
S-7
For each of the two alternative locations of powerhouse, following two options for power
tunnel were studied.
Option-1 with power tunnel on mild slope and surge tank provided before start of the
penstock.
Option-2 with power tunnel on steep slope of 1 in 12 and surge relief provided through
pressure relief valves.
In Alternative A, Option-1, length of weir is 82m, length of power tunnel is 1060m, height of
surge chamber is 30m and length of penstock is 538m.
In Alternative A, Option-2, length of the weir is 82m, length of power tunnel is 1548m, length
of penstock is 25m and no surge chamber is provided.
In Alternative B, Option-1, length of the weir is 82m, length of power tunnel is 1100m, height
of surge chamber is 30m and length of penstock is 522m.
In Alternative B, Option-2, length of weir is 82m, length of power tunnel is 1590m, length of
penstock is 25m and no surge chamber is provided.
Costs of these four alternatives were estimated. Alternative A, Option-1, has been selected
keeping in view the existing geological conditions of Power Tunnel. Thus the selected
scheme comprises a conventional type power tunnel with mild slop and a surge shaft at the
end.
Hydraulic Design Considerations
The hydraulic design studies of Jabori Hydropower Project include design of weir, intake,
sand trap, power tunnel, penstock, powerhouse and tailrace. The hydrological studies show
that minimum and maximum mean monthly discharges in Siran River are 2.71 and 11.26
cumecs respectively. The mean monthly discharge is 5.80 cumecs. Based on economic
evaluations, it was decided that power intake would be designed for a rated discharge of
6.28 cumecs that will produce approximately 6.5 MW of optimum power.
The main weir structure is proposed to be built of concrete. The weir length is 82m. The full
reservoir for spillway crest elevation is 1383m and live storage volume is 90,432 m3 above
elevation 1381m. The top of weir is at El. 1387m and a 4m wide bridge is provided across
spillway to enable vehicle access at the crest level. The average river bed level is El.
1374m. The total height of the weir is 13m above the bed, and 15.80 m above the
foundation. The ogee weir, undersluices and bottom outlets are designed to pass a flood of
970 cumecs which according to the revised hydrological studies, corresponds to a return
period of 1000 years. The main weir is divided in four parts, each 10m long, and is
separated by 1m thick piers. There are 3 undersluices each having opening of 1.5 m x 2 m
and 4 bottom outlets with openings of 3m x 3m. The stilling basin is 23m long.
The intake structure offtakes from the right bank of Siran River. The connecting conduit is
2.4m x 1.5m which offtakes from the intake structure whose inlet will be 3.90m wide and
2.50m high. The inlet is provided with trashrack and stoplog grooves.
S-8
The sand trap is 7.80m wide and 65m long. It has two compartments each 3.6m wide, and
is capable of retaining 0.2mm plus size of sediments.
The power tunnel is a horseshoe conduit of 2.1m diameter. It is 1060m long, and has a
slope of 1 in 1000. At start of the power tunnel the invert elevation is 1374m and at the end
it is 1372.9. The velocity in the power tunnel will be 1.81 m/sec.
Surge shaft has been provided at the end of concrete lined tunnel with 3.0m internal
diameter. The design height of the surge shaft will be 15m.
There is single penstock which is 511m long. The diameter of penstock is 1.5m having steel
linner thickness of 16-18mm.
Single tailrace channel for both units will be provided. The draft tubes will daylight in the
tailrace channel which will join the river with proper transitions.
Tailwater calculations at the site of the weir have been carried out by means of HEC-RAS
computer programme. To facilitate calculations and correctness of results, five river cross-
sections were used for data calculation at the weir site and five additional cross-sections at
the powerhouse site.
The diversion arrangements on the Siran River for constructing the main weir will cater for
two years of construction. The diversion discharge will be equivalent to 10 years return
period which is 160 cumecs.
The total head loss in the power system including all the components is 6.0m at full
discharge.
S7. Structural Design Studies
Design Approach: Except the powerhouse superstructure and residences, the project
components are designed as hydraulic structures. Minimum concrete strength and / or
cement content and hydraulic factor (BM = 1.30, and direct tension = 1.65) were adopted as
specified in ACI 350R-01. Loads considered in the design include dead loads and
permanent fixtures, imposed (live) loads, operation impact, earth pressure, hydrostatic
pressure, water hammer, uplift considered over entire base area, buoyancy
corresponding to loss of weight of submerged portion of the structure, gust (in accordance
with ANSI Code, wind velocity = 160km/hr), seismic inertial (force applied at CG), and
hydrodynamic forces (based on Westergaard equation). Structure proportions are generally
governed by hydraulics, structural stability (in OBE, MCE, High Flood conditions); and
functional requirements (access, freeboard, water-tightness etc). Design loads and loading
conditions are categorized as normal, exceptional and extreme. PMF or maximum gust
loads are not combined with seismic forces.
Seismic Factors: Seismic factor for pseudo-static stability analyses are adopted from
Seismic Hazards study. Modification is made in the Value at Site to account for damping
of ground motions, structures ductility, and incoherence of earthquake vibrations. Response
Spectrum used for dynamic analyses is based on Tabas (Iran) Earthquake of 1980.
S-9
Reinforcement Design: This is based on ACI Ultimate Strength Design (USD) method.
Grade 60 bars are used. Load factors for components other than power tunnel, are based
on ACI 318-01. Factors for power tunnel are adopted from US Army Corps of Engineers EM
1110-2-2901 Tunnels and Shaft in Rock. Design strength of members is taken as a
product of nominal strength and strength reduction factor. Allowable stresses as
increased in exceptional and extreme loading cases are according to ACI 318. Provisions
of document ACI 207.2R 95 Effect of Restraint, Volume Change and Reinforcement in
Massive Concrete Structures was followed to cater for concrete shrinkage. Ratio of
shrinkage and temperature reinforcement is given:
Structure Condition Structures In Dry Hydraulic Structures

Reinforcement Percentage 0.0020 0.0028
FOS against Sliding: In the pseudo-static stability analyses of Structures FOS against
sliding is 1.50, 1.25 and 1.10 in normal, exceptional and extreme loading conditions.
Joints and WS: Spacing of vertical construction joints is limited to 10m in restrained and
15m in unrestrained members. Time lapses for concrete pouring in adjacent panels is to be
staggered by 7 to 10 days. Synthetic or metallic waterstops shall be provided in
construction, contraction and expansion joints. If hydrostatic pressure is high, or probability
of differential settlement between adjacent members exists at the movement joint, double
row of WS has to be provided. Specified widths of WS is 300 to 500mm.
Design considerations for all the individual project components are elaborated in the
relevant sections of the report.
S8. Mechanical Equipment Studies
Mechanical equipment and systems will include turbines, governors, inlet valves, gates,
stoplogs, trashracks, cranes and hoists etc. The turbine selection was made considering
114m as rated head. To determine the installed capacity of power plant 6.28 m3/sec flow at
30% exceedence has been considered. From the comparative study of various turbine sizes
and combinations, two turbines each having 3.14 m3/sec flow have been selected. Both
turbines can be operated upto 60% exceedence while 40% of the time only one machine of
3.14 m3/sec will be operated. Considering turbine efficiency of 92% for the net head of
114m and design flow of 3.14m3/s, the power will be 6,461KW. These values will result in
the turbine specific speed (Ns) of 114.6mKW. An average runner diameter will be 728mm.
For determining the appropriate unit capacity, both technical as well as economic aspects
have been considered in the comparison after including equipment dimensions, transport
limitations, power and energy benefits, manufacturing experience, power system regulation,
and cost estimates etc. Considering generator efficiency as 98%, the corresponding
turbines output will be about 6.50MW for total rated discharge of 6.28m3/s and rated head of
114m.
S9. Electrical Equipment Studies
Considering operating net head of 114m and rated river flow of 6.28m3/sec, the optimized
power potential of two horizontal shaft francis turbines, both with 3.14m3/sec flow has been
S - 10
considered. Rated capacity for both turbines is P = 6,461KW. Corresponding rated output
will be 6.5MW. The turbine efficiency at rated flow is 92%,
The most important components of the main electrical equipment are the 11 kV
synchronous horizontal - shaft generators of matching capacity with the turbine output,
connected to three phase step-up transformers with 132 kV secondary voltages and an
outdoor 132 kV switchyard for connection to outgoing 132 kV transmission lines. Two
numbers of generators with generating capacity of 4.0 MVA have been selected, matched
with the maximum output of the selected turbines.
For the transmission of electrical power, one number three phase step up transformer with
rated capacity of 10/13 MVA has been proposed. The proposed switchyard scheme for this
hydropower station is the standard configuration i.e. single bus with single circuit breaker
arrangement. The electric power generated at Jabori hydropower station will be fed to
nearby 132KV Battal Grid Station through single circuit 132KV transmission line.
S10. Environmental Impact Assessment, Resettlement and Social Aspects
The lands in Jabori project area comprise cultivated lands, forest and settlements. The
project will consume 459 kanal of private land, out of which 232 kanal are being used for
cultivation while the rest includes forest land, residential land and waste land. Only one
house is falling in project area and needs relocation.
About 200 shade trees and 150 fruit trees lie in the project area, which have to be removed.
Flora of the project area includes; Darawa, Deodar, Shisham, Pine, Popular, Chir, Draic,
Bakain, Apricot, Pear, Peaches, and Apple.
Maize and rice are staple food of locals. Wheat, maize and paddy production is about
200kg, 360kg, and 280 kg/kanal respectively, as derived from census survey analysis.
No air quality monitoring data is available for the Project area. However, no major sources
of air pollution, viz., industries, exist in the area except road traffic in the valleys of Siran
River and other nullahs.Due to presence of ample plantation, the quality of air is good.
Quality of air along roads is impaired to some extent.
Siran river and springs are the main source of water in the project area. Water from
nullah/river and springs is safe for consumption from chemical ingredients point of view
although turbidity in river water is high during high flow season. Biological tests reveal that
even spring waters are contaminated with bacteria. The water would thus require
appropriate treatment, before it can be used for drinking by construction crews.
It is recommended that the proprietary land should be compensated in cash in accordance

with the market rates currently prevailing in the area. It is also recommended that the
villages near the project should be facilitated with proper drainage and sewerage systems.
The project area should be rehabilitated after completion.
The total environmental and resettlement cost is estimated as Rs. 68.20 million with land
acquisition considered for the reservoir retention level of El 1383 m.
S - 11
The proponent should make arrangement in the operation of the project for release of some
compensatory water from the Weir for downstream reach of the river, because the
agricultural practices depends on river water.
It is concluded that the Project activities have adverse effects of medium to high level in
some environmental areas. The overall environmental impact rating is low adverse.
S11. Construction Planning and Cost Estimate
A. CONSTRUCTION PLANNING
The construction planning for 6.5 MW Jabori hydropower project is largely dependant on the
following major factors:
- Construction of weir, power tunnel and powerhouse, is on the critical path.

- Long length of power tunnel.
- High and low flow periods in the Siran River
- Excavation in hard strata of powerhouse and power tunnel.
- Transmission line.
- Manpower, equipment and other resources available with the contractor.
There are five main components of the project:
- Weir
- Sandtrap
- Power tunnel and penstock
- Powerhouse
- Transmission line
The work on all these components can be carried out independently, and the schedule has
been prepared in such a way that the work can be taken up simultaneously on various sites
in order to complete the project in the shortest possible time. It is anticipated that the
construction of the project will be completed in 32 months period. The sequence, in which
the construction of various components of the project will be taken up, has been carefully
established. The construction activities along with time required to complete them is
summarized as follows:
Summary of Construction Schedule
Sr.
Description of Activity Duration
No.
1. Mobilization 15 Days
2. Acquisition of Land 06 Months
3. Temporary and Preliminary works 06 Months
4. Coffer Dams 02 Months for
each
5. Right part of main Weir, Intake and ancillary 07 Months
works
S - 12
6. Left part of main Weir and ancillary works 07 Months

7. Sandtrap and ancillary works 16 Months
8. Power Tunnel(1060m) and ancillary works 12 Months
9. Penstock 10 Months
10. Powerhouse Civil works 19 Months
11. Tailrace and ancillary works 06 Months
12. Powerhouse E&M manufacturing 12 Months
13. Powerhouse E&M installation works 08 Months
14. Switchyard and ancillary works 04 Months
15. Transmission Line and ancillary works 07 Months
16. Testing and Commissioning 10 Months
B. COST ESTIMATE
The total project construction cost of civil works has been estimated on the basis of rates of
various items of work as provided on the web site of Government of KP for 2nd quarter of
year 2009 for Mansehra District. These rates have been escalated upto June 2010 level.
Difficulty factor has also been included therein. In case of cost of E&M equipment due
consideration has been given to recession in the market. Equipment which can be
manufactured in Pakistan has also been valued appropriately. Summary of cost estimate is
given hereunder.
Summary of the Project Cost
Local Foreign Total

Sr.
Description Pak. Rs. Pak. Rs. Pak. Rs.
No.
(Million) (Million) (Million)
A Preliminary Works 92.70 - 92.70
B Environment and Resettlement 68.20 - 68.20
C Civil Works 534.75 - 534.75
D Electrical and Mechanical Works 127.68 271.11 398.79

Detail Design and Tender Documents @ 16.47 5.42 21.89
E
2%
F Administration and Legal Expense @ 3% 24.70 8.13 32.83
G Engineering and Supervision Costs @ 4% 32.93 10.84 43.78
H Physical Contingencies @ 5% 41.17 13.56 54.73
I Total Base Cost 938.60 309.06 1,247.66
J Import duties and Taxes @ 5% 12.91 - 12.91
K Price Escalation 133.75 16.50 150.25
L Interest during construction 194.00 55.39 249.39
Total Project Capital Cost 1,279.90 380.96 1,660.86
Price Level and Rate of Exchange
The estimate is based on June 2010 price level and includes foreign currency expenditure
in US dollars. The exchange rate of US$ 1.00 = Rs. 85.00 has been adopted.
S - 13
Basic Assumptions and Limitations
The cost estimate was based on the following assumptions:
- Construction of the project will be completed in 32 months.
- The economic conditions, both in Pakistan and worldwide, will remain essentially
stable.
- The project layout and work quantities as defined in the Feasibility Report will not be
significantly changed during the final design and construction stages (minor
variations are covered by contingencies).
- Resettlement and other preliminary activities will be completed by the owner without
affecting the key milestone dates.
S12. Economic and Financial Analyses
Economic Analysis:
In order to study the economic feasibility of Jabori Hydropower Project alternate cost
method is used, wherein the lifecycle cost of Jabori Hydropower project is compared with
the lifecycle cost of alternative thermal power plants. Alternative thermal power plants
include simple cycle gas turbine, combined cycle plant and slow or medium speed diesel
generating sets. Results of economic comparison are tabulated hereunder:
Economic indicators of Jabori HPP as compared EIRR BC Ratio

to:
a) Simple Cycle Gas Turbine 20.73% 1.52

b) Combined Cycle Plant 15.59% 1.18
c) Slow or Medium Speed Diesel Plant 18.69% 1.27
Key: EIRR = Economic Internal Rate of Return; BC Ratio = Benefit Cost Ratio
Sensitivity analysis:
To test the robustness of the economic appraisal of the project, a sensitivity analysis has
been carried out. This test has been performed only for the combined cycle plant thermal
equivalent as this alternative shows least benefit of the proposed project. The summary of
results of sensitivity analysis is presented as under:
Scenario EIRR % BC Ratio
Cost increase by 10% 14.90 1.15
Benefit Decrease by 10% 14.67 1.14
Combination of above 12.65 1.03
Key; EIRR = Economic Internal Rate of Return; BC Ratio = Benefit Cost Ratio
S - 14
Certified Emission Reduction (CER):
To estimate environmental benefits under clean development mechanism (CDM), air

pollution that would be emitted if power equivalent to Jabori HPP were generated by a
thermal alternative, has been estimated.
The calculated releases of carbon dioxide per kWh are 0.45 kg for a combined cycle plant
and 0.82 kg for a diesel plant. Therefore, one GWH reduction in hydroelectric power will
result in approximately 820 tons increase of CO 2 if the electricity is going to be produced by
the diesel plant and 450 ton increase if the electricity is to be produced by a combined cycle
plant.
The Jabori hydropower project will produce 41 GWh per annum, as such the project will
avoid emission of about 33,620 ton per annum of CO 2 if compared to diesel plant as an
equivalent thermal plant. It may reduce about 18,450 tons per annum of CO 2 if combined
cycle plant is considered as an alternative source of energy production. To monetize the
emission of CO 2 by the project, US$ 10 per ton of CO 2 has been taken. The monetary
value of CO 2 has been added in the cash flow for re-estimating the EIRR. The results are
summarized below.
Adding CER Benefits if Compared to Alternate Source of BC

EIRR %
Producing energy Ratio
Simple Cycle Gas Turbine 22.04 1.60
Combined Cycle Plant 17.22 1.26
Slow or Medium Speed Diesel Plant 21.21 1.53
Key; CER=Certified Emission Reduction of CO 2 ; EIRR = Economic Internal Rate of Return
Conclusion:
The results reveal that this project is economically viable as the EIRR is greater than the
opportunity cost of capital. Therefore, making investment in this project does not involve any
risk; hence the project is recommended for implementation.
Financial Analysis:
Annual recurring cost works out to Rs. 137.061 million. Following assumptions have been
made in the financial analysis.
Interest Rate of 13.17% for local and foreign costs financing has been used.
Sale price of Rs. 5.14 per kWh notified by the Cost Accounting Cell, WAPDA for the
year 2008-2009 has been projected to the commissioning year @ 5% per annum and
thereafter it has been kept constant throughout the life of the project thus making the
sale price as Rs. 6.89.
Annual O&M cost is considered as 2.5% of the total cost.
Calculations are based on constant price values of June, 2010.
S - 15
Useful operation time of 50 years has been considered for the project.
Net power generation of the project is calculated on a plant factor of 71% with 2% line
losses.
Average power cost calculation is based on annual power unit costs over the life of the
project.
Financial analysis carried out on the basis of above assumptions, gives Financial Internal
Rate of Return (FIRR) as 14.62% which shows that the project is viable. The analysis for
the financial performance of the project clearly indicates that the executing agency can
easily repay its loan installment of Rs. 215.29 million per year and the project has no
significant negative impact on any financial or economic resources.
S13. Conclusions & Recommendations
Conclusions
- Base cost of the project is estimated as Rs. 1247.63 million. While the project capital
cost is Rs. 1,660.86.
- Environmental Impact Assessment Studies have determined the overall impact rating of
the project activities as low adverse.
- The EIRR calculated in comparison with equivalent thermal plants as replacement of the
proposed Hydropower Project ranges from 16 to 21 percent.
- Financial analysis indicates a Financial Internal Rate of Return (FIRR) as 14.62% and
the project is adjudged viable. Unit cost per KWH available for sale will be
Rs. 3.34/KWH
Recommendation:
Engineering, economic and financial studies have classified Jabori Hydropower Project as
viable. Project is recommended for detailed engineering design and execution.
S - 16
Salient Features
Project Jabori Hydropower Project

Location Jabori (District Mansehra), Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan
WGS 84 coordinates Weir (E 3223825, N 11158883)
River Siran
Type Run-of-River
Purpose of Project Supply electricity to National Grid
Hydrology
Catchment Area 236 km2
Full Reservoir Level (FRL) 1383.00 masl
Long Term Average Flow 5.86 m3/s (minimum monthly flow 2.57 m3/s)
Design Flow (Q 30 ) 600 m3/s for power yield
Flood Discharge (Q 100 ) 970 m3/s
Flood Discharge (Q 1,000 ) 1093 m3/s
Flood Discharge (Q 10,000 ) 1048m3/sec
Diversion Dam
Type Low height concrete diversion weir
Top Weir Elevation 1387.00 masl
Crest Length 82.0 m
Total Height of Weir 15.80 m
Height of overflow section 9.0 m
(from river bed)
Spillway
Type Ogee, Overflow weir
No. of Bays 4 No.
Width of each Bay 10.0 m
Size of Settling Basin 23.0 m X 57 m
Design Flood (Q 1000 ) 907 m3/s
Flood passing through Ogee 77.37 m3/s (at Elev. 1384.0 masl)
S - 17
Outlets
No. of Bottom Outlets 4 No.
Size of Bottom Outlets 3.00 m x 3.00 m
Flood passing through Bottom Outlets 329.09 m3/s (at Elev. 1384.0 masl)
No. of Under Sluices 3 No.
Size of each Under Sulices 1.50 m x 2.00 m
Flood passing through Under Sulices 85.92 m3/s (at Elev. 1384.0 masl)
Intake
Type Side intake gate controlled
Conduit Length 130 m
Conduit Size 2.40 m x 1.50 m (Rectangular)
Sand Trap
Size of Sand Trap 80.85 m X 9.0 m
No. of chambers 2 No.
Particle size to be settled 0.2 mm
Power Tunnel
Length 1,060.0 m
Type Reinforced concrete lined
Diameter 2.1 m (Horse Shoe)
Tunnel slope 1:1000
Tunnel invert level 1374.00 masl
Velocity in tunnel 1.81 m/sec
Surge Shaft
Dia. 3.0 m
Height 15.0m
Penstock
Type Mild steel
Length 511 m
S - 18
Diameter 1.50 m
Thickness 16.00 to 18.00 mm
Velocity 3.55 m/sec
Tailrace
Type Rectangular concrete channel
Length of each channel 66 m
Size of tailrace 1.50 m x 2.50 m
Velocity 1.75 m/sec
Power Facilities
Powerhouse Type Surface
Dimensions 43.00 m x 18.00 m x 25.50 m (LxWxH)
Gross Head 117.0 m
Net Head 114.0 m
Design Discharge 6.28 m3/Sec
Installed capacity 6.50 MW
No. of units 2 No.
Turbines Type Horizontal Francis
Turbine Capacity (Each) 3.24 MW (3.14 m3/sec)
No. of Generators 2 No.
Generator Capacity (Each) 4.0 MVA
Power factor 0.85
Average annual energy 41.00 GWh
Plant factor 71%
Transmission Facilities
Transmission line 132 KV - 20 Km (at Battal grid station)
S - 19
CHAPTER
1
INTRODUCTION
Jabori Hydropower Project Final Feasibility Report Chapter - 1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
To explore and develop the hydropower potential in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province, the
Government set up Sarhad Hydel Development Organization (SHYDO) in 1986. SHYDO
and Deutch Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Techniche Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), a German
Government Agency for Technical Cooperation, in 1992, carried out extensive
investigations in Northern areas of Pakistan for the identification of potential sites for
hydropower generation.
Three hydropower projects viz: 18 MW Koto HPP on Panjkora river in Lower Dir District, 8
MW Jabori HPP on Siran river in Mansehra District, and 7.5 MW Karora HPP on Khan
Khwar in Shangla District, were amongst the potential schemes identified by SHYDO
GTZ. Location Plan at Figure-1.1 shows the locations of these Hydropower projects.
Associated Consulting Engineers ACE (Pvt.) Ltd. were assigned the task of conducting
Feasibility Studies for the three above-mentioned projects and a Contract for consultancy
services was signed accordingly. Initially the contract period was 18 months starting from 1st
August, 2008 and ending on 31st January, 2010. But the Contract had to be extended thrice
for valid reasons.
First extension upto July 2010 became necessary because of major deterioration in law &
order situation in the project areas and also because of an unexpected increase in the
scope of work in case of Karora HPP.
Second extension, upto Oct. 2010, had to be negotiated in the wake of exceptionally high
floods of July Aug. 2010 that hit the area hard and it seemed necessary to review the
effects of floods in the study area of three hydropower projects.
Third extension upto end August, 2011 was found necessary when the study of effects of
floods of 2010 in the area indicated that a revision of pre-flood hydrology and as a result
revision of several components of the Feasibility Studies, became essential.
1.2 Feasibility Studies Consultancy Contract
Earlier studies by SHYDO & GTZ were of preliminary nature. These were based on regional
hydrology of the area and 1:50,000 scale maps of Survey of Pakistan. The parameters
selected therefrom provided valuable guidelines for identification and general planning of
hydel schemes, however, verification and evaluation of these parameters had to be done
through collection and analysis of stream hydrological data and by conducting topographic
surveys of the project area. All other essential studies and investigations related to planning
and design of each project such as Geology, Seismicity, Environment, Hydraulic and
Structural design, Cost Estimates, Economic & Financial Analysis etc. had to be conducted
to evaluate the project feasibility. All these tasks were included in the scope of services to
be provided by the Consultants under the Consultancy Contract.
1-1
1.3 Present Feasibility Report
This report, the Feasibility Report for Jabori Hydropower Project, was preceded by Inception
Report, Pre-feasibility and Draft Feasibility Reports submitted earlier. All relevant studies
and investigations described in the Terms of Reference of the Consultancy Contract have
been duly completed and are contained in this Report.
The original Draft Feasibility Report of Jabori HPP was submitted in January 2010 for
Clients review. Comments and suggestions were received from ADB as well as from
SHYDO. After discussions and exchange of correspondence with the Client, necessary
modifications now have been made in the Feasibility Report. For convenience of reference,
comments/suggestion from ADB/SHYDO, replies to these and list of resulting modifications
in the report are placed separately as Annexure, in Volume III of the report.
As mentioned earlier the flood of July-August 2010 was so alarming that it was found
imperative to review the pre-flood design of the project vis--vis the post-flood scenario.
Accordingly the Consultants studied the impacts of the flood in the study area of all the
three Hydropower Projects and submitted the findings in a separate flood report in October
2010. Based on this report it was decided to review all the three Feasibility Studies for
post-flood conditions. The present report complies with this requirement.
Modifications accruing as a result of updated hydrology, are listed below:
i.) Fresh hydrological studies have been conducted with due consideration to the flood of
2010 and by making use of the extended hydro-meteorological data which has now
become available. The study has been added in this report while retaining the previous
study for comparison sake. Chapter No. 4 of the report which pertains to Hydrological
Studies has been divided into two parts: Part 4A contains the previous (pre-flood)
studies while Part 4B contains the post-flood hydrology.
ii.) Discharge capacity of the weir has been increased and the design of weir, as well as
the allied structures, has been modified to allow safe passage of revised design flood.
iii.) Structural Design has been conducted for the modified components of the project.
iv.) Cost Estimate has been revised.
v.) Construction Schedule, Economic and Financial Analyses have been revised.
vi.) All Subsequent changes in other parts of the Report have been incorporated.
According to the optimization studies the project has been designed for 30% dependable
river discharges and various parameters have also been checked against the guidelines
provided by PPIB in its Policy Framework and Package of Incentives for Private Sector
Hydel Power Generation Projects in Pakistan. Selection of number and size of power
generation units has also been done through an elaborate comparative study and the most
suitable option has been selected.
The present report is submitted in three volumes. Volume-I constitutes the Main Report;
Volume-II comprises Initial Environmental and Social Impact Assessment while additional
relevant information contained in Annexures is placed in Volume-III.
1-2
CHAPTER
2
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY AND SATELLITE

IMAGES (GIS)
CHAPTER 2
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY AND SATELLITE IMAGES (GIS)
2.1 General
Topographic survey has been carried out in the project area for establishing the existing
ground levels, location of existing physical features like rivers, streams, roads,
communication systems using modern equipments. Consultants also established control
points at locations easily accessible and identifiable at a later stage and to acquire field
survey data in digital format. The data has been processed using appropriate computer
software and for preparing the drawings on desired scales.
2.2 Scope of Work
The scope of work involved was:
Detailed river X-section survey at weir sites
Detailed topographic survey of the project area
Establishing Temporary Bench Marks (BM) with their levels
Construction of Permanent BMs near the existing buildings (Mosque, School, Hospital
etc.).
The topographic survey was carried out as per following details:
Intake area and area of all appurtenant structures, with contour interval of 2m on a
scale of 1:500
Trapezoidal canal with 2 m contour interval at a scale of 1:500.
Identification of head race tunnel alignment and definition of both portal axes with
contour interval of 2 m on a scale of 1:500.
Penstock area with contour interval of 2 m on a scale of 1:1000
Power House area including tailrace canal with contour interval of 2 m on a scale of
1:500.
Area of access road to surge tank and the weir with contour interval of 2 m on a scale
of 1:2000
2.3 Instruments Used
The following instruments have been used for topographic survey data at site.
2.3.1 Total Station TOPCON PT 3000 LN
The instrument is based on a unique pulse laser technology which allows to measure upto
250m in reflector less mode with complete safety and confidence.
2-1
2.3.2 E Trex Ground Positioning System (GPS)
E trex GPS is used for finding out approximate co-ordinates of various features in the
project area. The instrument has an accuracy rating of 3 meter in locating coordinates.
2.3.3 Establishing Horizontal Control
Survey of Pakistan (SOP) grid is always used as the reference datum. Combined efforts by
the Client and the Consultants have been made to get information from the SOP authorities
about the location of survey station in the project area, but without any success. However,
the contractor working for the expansion of Shinkiyari Jabori Sacha road has
established control points in different reaches of the road section. JN-33 A control point is
located near to weir site of the project. The elevation and co-ordinates of JN-33A is as
under:
Elevation: 1376.769 masl
Co-ordinates: N = 1159113.00 m
E = 3224658.00 m
The Consultants have used the above given co-ordinates for establishing all control points
in the project area.
2.4 Survey Maps
Survey maps in respect of each permanent survey point (Survey Marker), are prepared on
standard format. It contains general sketch for location of each control point, its detailed
description, final coordinates and elevation value. The following features were surveyed and
included in the maps in different layers:
Spot levels
Breaklines at significant slope changes such as top and toe of embankments.
River/Khwar embankment
Rock outcrop, the rock faces and single rock boulders> 5m
Land use classification
Survey control points
Buildings
Bridges
Roads, tracks and retaining walls
Any other physical features of significant importance.
2-2
2.5 Traversing
Traversing was carried out in a closed loop form to establish control in the area of interest
starting from the survey control point JN-33-A. The traverse distances were measured in
two directions (forward & back) and mean adopted. The field horizontal distances were
measured because the instruments used have built-in facility to convert the field slope
distance to horizontal.
The horizontal angles were measured on two zeros i.e. four pointing each way. Mean of the
4 angles was used in the traverse computation that provided the spread of angles which
was not more than 20 of arc.
The measured distances were corrected for various geodetic corrections and used in the
traverse computations. The summary of traverse control point is shown in Table-2.1
2.6 Location of Survey Control Points
The location of the survey control points has been selected on safe and stable ground for its
durability where it can last for maximum period of time.
2.7 Establishment of Vertical Control
Starting from Bench Mark (BM), leveling and check leveling was carried out using automatic
leveling instrument and leveling staves of quality. Good leveling procedures applicable to
this class of leveling were adopted i.e. holding the leveling staff on steel change plate and
keeping the back and foresight lengths equal etc.
2.8 Topographical Survey
Using the horizontal and vertical control established in the project area, topographic survey
was carried out using total stations in the form of random spot elevation survey to create
digital model. All man-made and natural features visible on the ground were surveyed and
plotted. Field survey data was acquired in digital format on electronic media and the same
was downloaded to the computer thus avoiding all the sources of human error caused in the
manual entry of field data. The data is available in softcopy.
The field data was computer-processed and computer-aided mapping carried out at scale of
1:1000. The contours were generated from the digital terrain model at the desired interval of
2m. The survey limit was up to the contour of 25 m above the bed level of Siran River at
weir site. The maps were produced in AutoCAD format and contain index contours and
minor contours in different colors with map grids at 10cm x 10cm interval, grid north, title
frame containing sheet No., date of survey, date of plotting projection system, scale, legend,
general notes and the list of survey control points. Detail of survey of the area is as shown
in Table-2.2. The topographic map of the project area is shown in Figure-2.1 and Figure-
2.2.
2.9 Satellite Images (GIS)
2-3
Base map of Jabori Hydropower Project was prepared using the cutting edge technologies
of remote sensing and GIS. Latest available high resolution satellite images were procured
to digitize the land features, whereas SRTM elevation data was utilized to generate
contours. Large scale and highly accurate survey points collected during field topographic
survey were also embedded into it to improve the map quality. Latest cartographic
environment was then used to prepare the GIS maps. Details of process adopted are given
in the following paragraphs.
2.9.1 Satellite Image Acquisition
As per requirement 25 km2 area was selected to place order for satellite images.
For better contrast between different land features, Color Infrared band composite was
selected. Therefore only second, third, fourth and one panchromatic band was procured.
This combination is named as Color Infrared Pan sharpened. The salient features of the
images are as follows.
Parameter Description
Satellite Quick Bird

Product Type Imagery
Product Option Color infrared (Pansharpened)
Bit Depth 8-Bit
File Format Geo-TIFF 1.0
Resolution 60 cm (Panchromatic/ Pansharpened)
Projection UTM
UTM Zone 43N
Zone Units Meters
Datum WGS84
Acquisition date JABORI Image 29 Sep 2006
2.9.2 Images Preprocessing
Data was already geo-referenced in UTM/WGS 84 coordinate system. For the production of
map in the Survey of Pakistans (SOP) map system, the data had to be re-projected. SOP
map system is a coordinate system which is used in the general topographic maps of
Survey of Pakistan. In this system Everest is used as reference datum and Lambert
Conformal Conic technique is used for projection. Detailed parameters of this projected
coordinate system are given below:
Parameter Description
Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
False Easting: 2743196.39
2-4
False Northing: 914398.8
Central Meridian: 68.0
Standard Parallel_1: 29.65
Standard Parallel_2: 35.314
Scale Factor: 1.0
Latitude Of Origin: 32.5
Linear Unit: Meter
Reference Ellipsoid Everest
Semi major axis 6377301.243
Inverse Flattening 300.8017255
Panchromatic high resolution band was already merged in the acquired bands. False
colour composite was prepared and fourth, third and second bands were then displayed in
red green and blue coloured layers. The output image was then enhanced using histogram
equalization technique. At this stage, prints of satellite images were also produced for field
survey and study purposes. Satellite image of Jabori project along with the surrounding
area is placed as Figure-2.3.
2.9.3 Feature Digitization
Afterward, several required land features were digitized from the satellite images. These
features included roads, bridges, builtup area and agriculture land. Name of various areas
were taken from three different sources i.e. district census report, existing SOP topographic
sheets and through field visits.
2.9.4 Elevation Data Processing
Contours were first generated from the erected SRTM elevation points. Points were
downloaded from the internet free data banks, and then interpolated with the help of
Krigging method to generate the DTM, which was later used to generate 5 meter interval
contours. Prints of these contours were also generated for study purposes.
In the second step, survey points of certain selected areas were acquired from topographic
survey using total station. These points were later mixed in the SRTM data to verify the
accuracy of SRTM points and also to generate more precise contours of the study area.
2.9.5 Map Preparation and Printing
A complete geo-database was then obtained containing 5m interval contours with other
existing features viz, roads, bridges, built up areas, agriculture lands etc. All these products
were then overlaid on each other inside a data frame which was already controlled under
the SOPs coordinate system. Afterwards, cartographic rules and mapping standards were
used to prepare maps.
2-5
Finally, the spatial data from GIS environment was transformed to CAD format, so that it
can be utilized for planning and development purposes. The contour map thus developed is
shown in Figure-2.4.
2-6
TABLES
Table-2.1
Traverse 1 u/s
Direct Co-ordinate from Total Station
Sr. Name of Co-ordinate (m) Elevation (m) Remarks

No. Points
N E
1 JN 33A 1159113.000 3224658.000 1376.769 TBM. Co-
on Road ordinates fixed by
GPS (Elevation
assumed)
2 J-9 1159259.110 3224761.688 1347.554 BM. On top of
steel 3" dia and 6"
length in boulder
3 J-8 1158953.830 3224659.523 1353.698 -do-
4 J-7 1158915.990 3224568.129 1358.860 -do-
5 J-6 1158812.499 3224310.692 1361.617 -do-
6 J-5 1158872.535 3224111.421 1384.295 -do-
7 J-4 1158810.633 3223828.160 1376.705 -do-
8 J - 5A 1158867.667 3223977.958 1373.619 -do-
9 J - 6A 1158896.991 3224270.022 1393.360 -do-
10 J-3 1159080.357 3223611.214 1380.123 -do-
11 J-2 1159446.608 3223744.322 1391.757 -do-
12 J-1 11596671.247 3223802.021 1389.843 -do-
13 J - 2A 1159284.425 3223785.349 1440.888 TBM. On stone
14 J-B 1159080.183 3223829.569 1419.569 -do-
15 J-C 1159046.103 3223894.415 1416.718 -do-
16 J-D 1158938.484 3224405.526 1394.605 -do-
17 J-E 1159019.291 3224547.889 1389.911 -do-
18 J-F 1159046.122 3224599.267 1382.170 -do-

19 JN33A 1159111.469 3224658.228 1376.940 TBM. (Road party)
(J-G)
20 J-9 1159257.545 3224761.905 1352.989 Closing error.
N = +1.539,
E = +0.226
Traverse 2 u/s
Direct Co-ordinate from Total Station
Sr. Name of Co-ordinate (m) Elevation (m) Remarks

No. Points
N E
1 J-9 1159259.084 3224761.679 1347.554 BM. On top of

steel 3" dia and 6"
length in boulder
J - 10 1159381.610 3224945.990 1341.826 -do-
2
J - 11 1159381.665 3225157.304 1338.602 -do-

3
J - 12 1159153.248 3225218.298 1335.620 -do-

4
J - 13 1158780.094 3225490.634 1318.671 -do-

5
J - 14 1158448.535 3225373.506 1318.630 -do-

6
J - 15 1158170.757 3225448.479 1304.382 -do-

7
J - 16 1157806.508 3225744.714 1307.294 -do-

8
J - 18 1157570.610 3224995.507 1276.569 -do-

9
J - 19 1157664.516 3225033.230 1297.046 -do-

10
J - 20 1157708.804 3224998.787 1308.495 -do-

11
J - 22 1157917.986 3224983.362 1348.947 -do-

12
J - 23 1157953.000 3225357.914 1339.553 -do-

13
J - 25 1158863.247 3225091.778 1442.139 On nail

14
15 JN33A 1159113.100 3224658.414 1376.680 TBM. (Road

(J-26) Party)
16 J-9 1159259.158 3224762.134 1347.490 Closing error.
N = +0.74,
E = -0.475
Table-2.2
Detailed Topographic Survey
Sr. Description Northing Easting Elevation

No. (m) (m) (m)
3 SH 3224104.84 1158891.02 1366
4 SH 3224113.22 1158890.92 1366.29
5 SH 3224124.81 1158887.85 1366.06
6 SH 3224133.13 1158883.24 1365.63
29 TEO 3224406.65 1158726.32 1361.37
30 TEO 3224414.38 1158733.73 1361.5
31 TEO 3224424.71 1158747.53 1361.59
32 TEO 3224384.76 1158736.97 1361.41
87 NAL BED 3224210.87 1158772.4 1372.18
89 NAL BED 3224206.25 1158769.77 1376.22
90 NAL BED 3224203.62 1158766.16 1380.46
92 NAL BED 3224203.6 1158766.14 1380.44
93 NAL BED 3224196.44 1158764.84 1386.67
94 NAL BED 3224188.46 1158760.64 1394.65
95 NAL BED 3224182.36 1158758.09 1401.19
422 J5A 3223978 1158867.7 1373.619
423 J4 3223827.2 1158810.2 1376.719
424 RWL 3223832.7 1158819.7 1373.019
425 RWL 3223853.5 1158809.4 1372.519
426 RWL 3223871 1158803.3 1372.019
427 RWL 3223893.1 1158801.7 1371.319
428 RWL 3223931.5 1158809.2 1370.919
429 RWL 3223931.5 1158809.1 1370.919
430 RWL 3223944.5 1158818.1 1370.119
656 TEO 3224095.9 1158884.4 1366.619
657 TEO 3224095.7 1158875.7 1367.419
658 TEO 3224095.3 1158865.5 1367.119
659 TEO 3224102.3 1158860.8 1367.119
660 TEO 3224106.7 1158855.3 1367.119
1700 FORST" 3224041.4 1158948.5 1368.5
1701 FORST" 3224038.6 1158964.8 1368.4
1702 FORST" 3224052.2 1158951.3 1368.6
1703 FORST" 3224033.8 1158983 1368.2
1704 FORST" 3224052.7 1158965.2 1368.5
1705 FORST" 3224053.2 1158975.9 1368.4
1706 FORST" 3224062.3 1158950.1 1368.6
1865 FORMNG" 3223872.8 1158941.9 1385.5
1866 FORMNG" 3223865.9 1158933.2 1389.5
1867 FORMNG" 3223868 1158942.1 1388.6
1868 FORMNG" 3223860.5 1158936.9 1392.6
1869 FORMNG" 3223872.2 1158948.6 1387.6
1870 FORMNG" 3223860.4 1158936.8 1392.6
1928 BLD" 3223922.6 1158959.8 1373.2
1929 BLD" 3223926.2 1158965.4 1373.3
No. (m) (m) (m)
1930 BLD" 3223934 1158962.3 1373
1931 BLD" 3223939.6 1158976.9 1373.2
1932 BLD" 3223933.3 1158983.7 1373.8
1933 BLD" 3223927.8 1158979.2 1375.4
1934 BLD" 3223919.2 1158985 1378.6
3 RVR BD 3224141.136 1158886.158 1363.761
4 RVR BD 3224170.989 1158872.508 1363.075
5 RVR BD 3224265.156 1158849.875 1359.86
6 RVR BD 3224258.894 1158840.358 1360.39
7 RVR BD 3224300.9 1158837.443 1358.959
8 RVR BD 3224304.342 1158819.466 1359.308
9 RVR BD 3224336.617 1158842.135 1358.041
201 LWL 3223810.011 1158894.437 1373.803
202 LWL 3223820.972 1158876.416 1373.678
203 LWL 3223801.905 1158903.754 1373.682
204 LWL 3223801.068 1158912.189 1373.793
382 LWL 3223793.315 1158919.169 1373.827
383 LWL 3223801.211 1158913.279 1373.754
704 WATR PIP 3223642.98 1159146.495 1385.629
719 BLD 3223679.942 1159120.403 1394.482
720 BLD 3223669.37 1159114.786 1391.915
721 BLD 3223678.558 1159130.14 1395.638
722 BLD 3223655.024 1159146.274 1393.688
723 BLD 3223671.59 1159149.153 1395.514
724 BLD 3223671.576 1159149.137 1395.512
742 ISLD 3223619.816 1159145.811 1380.63
743 ISLD 3223622.512 1159140.417 1380.485
744 ISLD 3223622.52 1159127.97 1380.151
745 ISLD 3223626.118 1159116.033 1379.734
746 ISLD 3223629.354 1159102.65 1379.417
747 ISLD 3223632.94 1159089.032 1379.132
388 Dld 3223703.08 1159283.1 1385.821
389 Dld 3223720.96 1159271.35 1386.261
390 Dld 3223703.28 1159277.74 1384.821
391 Dld 3223710.39 1159271.91 1385.341
392 Dld 3223709.78 1159277.23 1385.431
525 EP 3223548.13 1159189.1 1395.991
526 EP 3223600.8 1159286.99 1395.911
857 temp brig 3223642.76 1159285.62 1381.551
858 temp brig 3223652.27 1159281.34 1381.661
244 BRG 3223682.082 1159455.019 1391.145
245 BRG 3223681.503 1159453.036 1391.206
246 BRG 3223740.678 1159440.1 1390.704
247 BRG 3223740.296 1159438.384 1390.68
492 TRFR 3223718.187 1159581.989 1392.875
493 EP 3223644.029 1159544.365 1403.758
497 RWL 3223688.956 1159449.028 1384.397
No. (m) (m) (m)
498 RWL 3223693.16 1159471.202 1384.852
499 RWL 3223698.523 1159487.352 1385.096
500 RWL 3223705.503 1159500.474 1385.418
509 BD LVL 3223777.936 1159703.636 1388.76
512 ISND 3223786.622 1159640.079 1388.642
513 ISND 3223785.272 1159627.729 1388.537
514 ISND 3223783.43 1159614.542 1388.018
515 ISND 3223780.745 1159601.265 1387.393
516 ISND 3223776.171 1159581.505 1386.928
528 BD LVL 3223781.75 1159653.691 1388.244
534 BD LVL 3223744.207 1159583.849 1386.908
581 R WAL L 3223676.949 1159698.23 1393.999
582 R WAL L 3223665.281 1159694.259 1394.018
583 R WAL L 3223649.607 1159688.616 1394.371
584 R WAL 3223633.262 1159682.469 1394.6
19 X SEC 3224802.472 1159311.296 1346.658
20 X SEC 3224798.159 1159315.787 1346.418
21 X SEC 3224794.975 1159319.103 1346.321
22 X SEC 3224791.312 1159322.917 1345.499
23 X SEC 3224790.694 1159323.561 1344.5
24 X SEC 3224789.115 1159325.205 1344.263
25 X SEC 3224787.651 1159326.73 1342.571
26 RWL 3224784.892 1159329.603 1341.78
27 BD LVL 3224783.034 1159331.538 1341.137
28 BD LVL 3224778.292 1159336.477 1341.264
29 BD LVL 3224775.841 1159339.03 1341.436
30 LWL 3224774.672 1159340.247 1341.885
31 X SEC 3224772.643 1159342.361 1341.977
32 X SEC 3224772.525 1159342.484 1343.768
33 X SEC 3224771.993 1159343.038 1344.574
34 X SEC 3224771.602 1159343.445 1345.433
35 X SEC 3224771.022 1159344.049 1346.371
36 X SEC 3224770.396 1159344.701 1348.012
37 X SEC 3224769.784 1159345.338 1349.097
38 X SEC 3224769.225 1159345.92 1350.937
39 X SEC 3224767.94 1159347.259 1352.741
40 X SEC 3224766.538 1159348.719 1354.587
41 X SEC 3224765.406 1159349.898 1356.598
42 RD R 3224764.062 1159351.297 1358.153
43 RD L 3224758.33 1159357.267 1358.222
237 GRAVE 3223574.224 1158955.947 1403.907
238 GRAVE 3223570.245 1158957.674 1403.821
239 GRAVE 3223574.197 1158952.03 1407.835
240 GRAVE 3223580.825 1158956.326 1397.265
241 GRAVE 3223591.165 1158947.755 1405.743
242 GRAVE 3223583.011 1158950.943 1406.521
243 GRAVE 3223603.386 1158948.002 1398.342
No. (m) (m) (m)
244 GRAVE 3223621.452 1158933.584 1390.875
4 BD LVL 3224787.889 1159331.479 1341.667
5 BD LVL 3224739.699 1159282.383 1343.172
6 BD LVL 3224728.181 1159225.056 1343.521
7 BD LVL 3224739.492 1159148.677 1346.008
8 BD LVL 3224745.98 1159072.139 1347.554
9 BD LVL 3224719.011 1159009.599 1349.179
10 BD LVL 3224641.133 1158975.409 1351.292
11 GARDN 3223971.709 1158879.381 1372.828
13 GARDN 3223959.37 1158891.056 1372.982
14 GARDN 3223942.762 1158900.565 1373.003
15 GARDN 3223940.21 1158900.593 1373.612
16 GARDN 3223950.142 1158891.742 1373.843
17 GARDN 3223964.164 1158884.394 1374.694
18 GARDN 3223895.378 1158736.962 1393.906
19 GARDN 3223967.36 1158876.865 1373.849
20 GARDN 3223890.581 1158735.94 1393.994
21 GARDN 3223971.301 1158870.432 1373.633
22 GARDN 3223948.453 1158875.463 1374.077
23 GARDN 3223895.108 1158715.918 1394.453
528 MOSQE 3225027.607 1157412.961 1270.684
529 MOSQE 3225033.223 1157413.604 1271.474
530 MOSQE 3225026.518 1157403.723 1269.521
225 ROAD 3225176.169 1157953.369 1327.202
226 ROAD 3225161.621 1157954.73 1328.806
227 ROAD 3225141.966 1157957.425 1330.013
228 ROAD 3225125.867 1157954.16 1331.025
229 ROAD 3225103.523 1157950.169 1331.799
230 ROAD 3225085.614 1157947.972 1332.318
231 ROAD 3225064.152 1157941.489 1332.872
232 ROAD 3225045.449 1157931.051 1333.855
233 ROAD 3225034.526 1157920.87 1333.661
234 ROAD 3225012.682 1157901.334 1332.635
692 IRR.CHNL 3225002.268 1157536.149 1255.576
693 IRR.CHNL 3225008.921 1157548.969 1255.461
694 IRR.CHNL 3225017.106 1157559.939 1255.357
695 IRR.CHNL 3225024.193 1157572.78 1255.943
696 IRR.CHNL 3225026.386 1157579.632 1256.023
697 IRR.CHNL 3225041.533 1157584.253 1255.883
Legend:
Bed Level BD LVL

Boulder BDR
Bridge BRIG
Building BLD
Cross Section X SEC
Electric Pole EP
Farms FORMNG
Forest FORST
Garden GARDN
Irrigation Channel IRR CHNL
Island ISLD
Nallah Bed NAL BED
Permanent Bench Mark PBM
Reference Point J5A
Reference Point J4
Retaining Wall R WALL
Right Water Level RWL
Left Water Level LWL
Road Left RD L
Road Right RD R
Temporary Bridge TEMP BRIG
Track TRK
Transformer TRFR
Water Pipe WATR PIP
FIGURES
CHAPTER
3
GEOLOGY, GEOTECHNICAL
ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION
MATERIALS
CHAPTER 3
GEOLOGY, GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS
3.0 Introduction
This section of the report encompasses the geological and tectonic set up of the region, the
investigations executed in the field, geological and geotechnical evaluation of the foundation
conditions and the parameters established for use in the design of various structures and
rock excavations for both surface and underground structures. Also, a brief description of
the construction materials has been given.
3.1 General Project Information
The project area is situated in Jabori Town (District Mansehra) on the Siran River. The
Siran River crosses the KaraKoram Highway KKH about 18 km downstream of weir site
and 3 km from Shinkiari Town. The Shinkiari Dadar Jabori road provides the access to
the project area. Currently the widening and metalling of this road is in progress.
The selected project components (Alternative A, option -2 as per Section 6.1.7) comprise
the weir and related water control structures, 130 m long conveyance / Intake conduit
leading to sand trap, power conduit 135 m long leading to the Power tunnel Intake area
situated near Jabori Town on the right bank of Siran river. The 1060 m long Power Tunnel
shall pass through nearly 400 m high ridge in the middle, followed by surge shaft and 511 m
long surface Penstock leading to the Powerhouse near village Garanthali. The Powerhouse
area shall be located on the right bank of Siran River about 100 m downstream of the
existing Garanthali foot bridge over Siran River. A tailrace channel shall lead the water from
Powerhouse back to the Siran River.
3.2 Previous Studies
Jabori Hydropower Project was initially conceived by GTZ during 1996-98 and a report
submitted to SHYDO in 1998. However, this report covered the initial features of the Project
only and identified tentatively its power potential. No specific geological or geotechnical
investigations or studies were carried out by GTZ. The above mentioned report forms the
basis for the current studies.
General information regarding regional geological and tectonic set up has been gathered
from the published literature from various universities, Geological Survey of Pakistan (GSP)
and other organizations.
3.3 Present Studies
Current studies are aimed at preparing a detailed Feasibility Report of the Project, based on
sufficient surface and subsurface investigations. Details of the current studies and
investigations are given in Section 3.5, however, a brief account is presented in this section.
The completed investigational works include geological and geotechnical studies, mapping
3-1
of the Project area, exploratory drilling on all the significant Project structures, the
geophysical survey through seismic refraction profiling, excavation of test pits in the Project
area, the potential borrow areas for construction materials and the laboratory testing of the
soil and rock samples etc. A thorough study and review of the collected field and laboratory
data has been carried out for use in the selection and optimization of the Project features
and their design.
3.3.1 Execution Arrangements
The consultants selected suitable agencies, expertise and contractors for the execution of
surface and subsurface geological and geotechnical investigations at site. The Geological
mapping and related field studies in the Project area were conducted by the Consultants,
while the exploratory drilling, laboratory testing and geophysical survey was awarded to M/s
Pacific Engineering and Geotechnical Services PEGS with the approval of the Client.
The Consultants provided full time supervision at all stages of the investigations and testing
works by the Contractor, through its field staff and experts in the relevant fields.
3.4 Topography and Geomorphology of the Project Area
The Project area is situated amongst moderate to high relief mountains of the Lesser
Himalayas. The mountain chains are almost parallel in the East to West direction through
which almost all the major rivers flow in generally North-South direction. Among these
rivers, are the Kunhar and Jehlum on the East and Indus on the West. The relief of the
surrounding mountains is quite high, however, in the Project area it is of moderate level,
particularly on the right bank of Siran River through which the power tunnel shall pass. The
Siran River is the left bank tributary of the Indus River and after traveling in south-south-
west direction, it joins the Tarbela lake near Haripur.
The Siran River in the Project area frequently meanders through a rather open valley and in
a stretch of about 7 km ( along the area road ) the river takes about 8 10 sharp turns en-
route. The meandering nature of the river has given rise to a promising shortcut between a
weir and the Powerhouse with appreciable head for the generation of the power.
The Project area is marked by moderately rising mountains with a few flat terraces generally
occurring along the Siran River, which is the main channel of the region. Numerous
perennial nallas flowing from different directions join the river in the Project area. A road has
been constructed along the left bank of the river generally in a difficult and high rising terrain
with high road cuts in rocky strata. The major Project components are planned entirely on
the right bank of the Siran River for reasons given in the layout chapter.
Natural springs have been observed at numerous places on both the banks of the river, in
the Project area and its near vicinity. The more prominent springs falling within the area of
interest are shown in the Geologic map (Figure-3.4).
3.5 Regional Geology and Tectonics
The tectonic setting of Northern Pakistan is characterized by the collision of Eurasian Plate
in the North and Indian Plate in the South. This collision started in Late Eocene (50 Ma) and
3-2
is still continuing in the region. The continuous subduction of the Indian plate under the
Eurasian plate has given rise to the mega features such as Main Karakoram Fault (MKE) in
the North and Main Mantle Thrust (MMT) in the South. The Kohistan Island Arc (KIA)
occupies the area between these two mega features, as shown in the Regional Tectonic
Map Figure-3.1. The Himalayan orogeny in the form of northward movement and
subduction of the Indian Plate has given rise to numerous other tectonic features like
Hazara Thrust Fault System, Main Boundary Thrust (MBT), Main Frontal Thrust (MFT) /
Riasi Thrust and the Kashmir Thrust.
The Regional Geological information available in William, M.P. (1989) and Treloar, P.J.
(1989) identified three nappes / tectonic blocks in the southern region of Main Mantle Thrust
(MMT). The three nappes are;
The Besham Nappe in the centre of the region
The Swat Nappe in the West and the
Hazara Nappe in the East.
The Jabori Project (Mansehra) is situated in the Hazara Nappe / tectonic block, which is
briefly described hereinafter.
The Hazara Nappe is separated from the Besham Nappe through mylonitic Thakot shear
zone and consists of meta - sedimentary rocks of Pre Cambrian age mainly belonging to
the Tanawal Formation. This Formation is frequently intruded by thick sheets of Mansehra
Granite. The whole sequence is locally topped unconformably by the calcareous sediments
of Abbottabad Formation of Palaeozoic age.
The geological and tectonic set up covering Mansehra area in Hazara Nappe has been
shown on the Local area Geological Map Figure-3.2, reproduced from GSP Map (record
Vol. 13 part -1). In this map the Indus River marks the western boundary and the Jehlum
River marks the eastern boundary of the region. This map indicates that the sedimentary
rocks of Murree Formation, Abbottabad Formation and the Hazara Formation are situated in
the East and South of Mansehra. These formations have been frequently intruded by the
Mansehra Granite batholith in the form of huge igneous bodies. The intrusions of the
granitic mass have caused metamorphism of the pre - existing rocks and have given rise to
meta-sediments of varying degree of metamorphism. This geological map shows that the
Siran River takes its origin from the metamorphic complex in the North and after passing
through this formation near Jabori site, extend up to Shinkiari where the main igneous
intrusion of Mansehra Granite crops out covering large extent area.
The detail of the regional tectonic features and seismicity is given in Chapter 5 Seismic
Hazards.
3.6 Field Investigations
The field investigations were carried out at the Jabori site which included geological
mapping, collection of discontinuity data along various engineering structures, exploratory
drilling at various locations, geophysical seismic profiling in the dam site and Powerhouse
3-3
area, and the construction material investigations. The field activities completed during the
current investigations are shown in the Investigation Plan Figure-3.3 (02 sheets).
3.6.1 Geological Mapping of the Project Area
The geological mapping was carried out in the field with the help of survey instruments. The
lithology and the structural features in the Project area and discontinuity / joint survey data
was collected in the field for various project components. The geological mapping was also
extended to the reservoir area and was studied in detail for its future functioning. The
composite Geological map of the Project area is presented in Figure-3.4. The detailed
geological maps and sections for each project component are given in respective sections.
3.6.2 Scanline Discontinuity Survey and Joint Data Collection
The tectonic features and the discontinuity scanline survey data was collected during the
course of geological mapping in the field. The main emphasis has been on the abutment
areas of the weir, the intake area of the Power tunnel, the power tunnel route corridor and
the Powerhouse areas. The field data pertaining to this study has been given in Annexure-
3.C.
The collected data was processed and interpreted in the form of Rose diagrams and stereo
- nets for determining the stability of various design parameters for the surface and the
underground excavations, including the pressure tunnel, and finally for determining the
support system for the power tunnel.
3.6.3 Exploratory Drilling
The drilling activities at Jabori Project site were carried out by drilling contractor. The rotory
drilling was carried out both in the overburden and in the rock strata in the weir site, intake
power tunnel, power house and tailrace areas. In all 08 boreholes have been drilled with a
cumulative drilling of 180 m. The details of the drilling completed at various sites / structures
is given in Table-3.1 and the hole locations shown in Figure-3.3. The drilling logs pertaining
to the holes are given in Annexure-3.A.
The in-situ testing in the boreholes were also conducted during the course of drilling
operations. These included the performance of permeability tests using Constant Head
Method for the permeability in overburden, the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) & Cone
Penetration Test (CPT) for relative density of soil and river bed material, as well as Water
Pressure Tests WPT (Packer) / Lugeon test for the bedrock (Table-3.2). The details of the
test performed are given in the respective bore hole logs in Annexure- 3.A.
3.6.4 Geophysical Survey
The geophysical survey was also conducted by M/S. PEGS. The main purpose of this
survey was to determine the bed rock conFigureuration under various structures and also to
determine the density of the material in the areas of interest. The Seismic Refraction Survey
method was used for this purpose. The technical data was collected in the field through
spreads of 120 m and 240 m in length. The seismic dynamic waves were artificially
generated through small scale blasts at the ends and then in the centre of the spread.
3-4
These spreads were mainly located on rather flat terraces in the weir site area and in the
Powerhouse area. In all 15 Nos. of spreads with different lengths were executed in the field.
The details of the seismic refraction profiling works completed at weir site and Powerhouse
area are given in Table-3.3 and shown in Figure-3.3.
The seismic refraction data collected in the field was analyzed, processed and interpreted in
the form of sections showing the bed rock conFigureuration along the lines of the executed
profiles. This information has been used in the design of various structures. The final report
is presented as Annexure 3.D.
3.6.5 Test Pits Excavation
The test pits were excavated both for the purpose of foundation material and for the
construction material studies. The details of the test pits excavated in the weir site and
powerhouse area are given in Table-3.4 and shown in Figure-3.3. The in situ Field Density
Tests were also conducted during the course of excavation of the test pits. The test pit logs
are given in Annexure 3.B.
3.6.6 Collection of Rock and Soil Samples
The soil samples including both the bulk samples and the undisturbed block samples were
collected from the test pits for various laboratory tests to be obtained from Consultants
approved laboratories. The purpose was to determine various design parameters of soil for
foundations and construction materials.
Nine (09) Nos. of surface rock samples and three (03) rock core samples were collected
from various rock units encountered at site for petrographic analysis. Besides, the rock core
samples were also collected from the drilled rocks for rock mechanics and other laboratory
tests to be used in the design of the structures.
3.6.7 Laboratory Testing
A comprehensive program for the testing of the soil and rock samples collected from the
site were handed over to contractor for laboratory testing. Total number of seven (07)
programs were given to contractor and summary of results is given in Tables-3.5.2 to 3.5.6.
Particular emphasis has been given to the petrographic analysis to determine the exact
nature of the rocks containing the micaceous contents (muscovite and biotitie etc) and to
determine the Alkali Silica Reaction (ASR) potential of the rock material for concrete
aggregate and to assess the type of cement to be used in the Project construction. The
overall results of laboratory tests are enclosed as Annexure - 3.E.
3.7 Geology and Tectonics of the Project Area
The geology and tectonics of the Project area has been picked up in the field with the help
of survey and is presented in the form of a Composite Geological Map (Figure-3.4). The
geology at various structure sites has also been presented in the detailed geological maps
attached with the respective project features.
3-5
3.7.1 Lithology
The lithology of the area is diversified and comprises the metamorphic rocks consisting
dominantly of quartz mica schist with interbeds of marble and quartzite, slates, and intruded
igneous bodies of diorite / diabase. Besides, at some places the quartzo - feldspathic dykes
and pegmatites are also observed as injected and scattered bodies in the Project area. The
major rock units are described below and shown in the Composite Geological map of the
Project area (Figure-3.4).
The lithology of various rock units have been determined through petrographic analysis. In
all twelve (12) rock samples were tested. The results of petrographic analysis are
summarized in Table-3.5.1. The test results have indicated that the degree of
metamorphism ranges from quartz mica schist to the staurolite garnet mica schist, which
are relatively of higher grade. Also, the percentages of micaceous contents range from 30
% to 52 % in the Project area. The quartz content in the metamorphic rocks of all the
categories ranges from 31 to 65 %. The strained quartz considered as deleterious to the
use of Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) is 2 to 20 % in the high grade metamorphic rocks
(staurolite mica schists).
The various lithic units are briefly described below;
Overburden
River bed alluvium Gray, loose, sandy gravel cobbles with boulders, rounded to
sub rounded, moderately strong to strong, dominantly of metamorphic (quartz mica
schist) and igneous (granitic ) origin. Sand fine to medium grained and loose to
medium dense.
Lower Terrace Grayish brown to gray, medium dense, comprising old river terraces
material having silty / clayey cover with some angular pieces of rock fragments at
places; generally occur slightly above the river valley.
Upper Terrace Brown to brownish gray, compact, silty / clayey gravels and boulders
with occasional rock blocks, sub rounded, angular to sub angular, generally situated
at higher level and are under agriculture use. These terraces at places form thin to
thick cover over the bed rock.
Scree / slope wash deposits The colluvial material situated on the hill slopes as
loose angular rock fragments fallen from the rock faces, generally choked in silt /
clay matrix. Also present as nallah bed material, extending into the river valley.
Generally of metamorphic origin. Present dominantly on the right bank at weir site.
Bed rock
Quartz Mica Schist Light gray to gray, moderately weathered to fresh, at places
highly weathered to brown color, moderately strong to strong, thinly to moderately
bedded, moderately to highly schistosed and foliated with distinct mica layers with
smooth and polished surfaces, weak to moderately strong, at some places trace
garnet in the form of small grains observed moderately jointed and highly
fractured at places. Thinly bedded and less metamorphosed beds of micaceous
3-6
quartzites present as hard cores in the quartz mica schists, which are moderately
strong to strong in nature..
Quartzite Gray to dark gray, thinly to thickly bedded, micaceous, moderately

strong to strong, relatively less metamorphosed rock units present as cores, ribs
and lenses in the quartz mica schist rock units, also present as alternating beds
with quartz mica schist.
Marble White to gray and dark gray in wavy pattern, moderately strong, medium
to thickly bedded (generally upto 2 m thick), interbedded with quartz mica schist,
massive to blocky in nature, sparsely jointed with well developed joint planes.
Moderately to highly fractured with peculiar feature of re-healing and cementation
of the fractured marble pieces present as layers in the scree deposits at places.
Slates Dark gray to grayish brownish, fine grained, slightly metamorphosed,

thinly to moderately bedded, moderately strong to strong, moderately jointed,
slatey cleavage distinctly developed.
Intruded Igneous bodies Present as thin bodies of dolerites / diabase and

gabbro of basic igneous origin intruded into the country rock (Quartz mica schist /
slates and granite), dark gray to black, medium to coarse grained, well
crystallized, strong to very strong, The doleritic body exposed along the right bank
of Siran river in the power house area is about 10 m thick with exposed length of
25 m. This body is parallel to the foliation of the country rock in the form of sills
etc. Besides, some quartzo- feldspathic veins and pegmatites of acidic igneous
origin are also present in the Project area, however not noted within the limits of
the mapped area.
It has been observed in the field that generally the contact between various rock units
described above have sheared contacts indicating the displacement against each other.
This is evident in quartz mica schist and in other alternating rock units.
3.7.2 Tectonics
The tectonic and structural features have also been picked up and studied in the field. The
trend (strike and dip) of the individual beds have also been picked-up and recorded to
determine the overall structural trend of the rock units. This study has indicated that two
prominent structural features, one syncline and the other anticline exist in the Project area
from weir site to the powerhouse. The synclinal feature is anticipated between the weir axis
and the power Intake area. The syncline has its axis in NE SW direction dividing the area
into two distinct blocks. The up-stream block covering the weir site area is the northern
block which dips moderately (15 to 30 deg) towards south / south-east, whereas the
southern block covering entirely the power facilities area has high dips ranging from 50 to
60 deg towards north north west. This feature is shown in the Geological Map Figure-3.4
The anticline feature is present in the area of Powerhouse, where the anticline axis passes
along the river Siran (near the existing foot bridge of Garanthali village). The right side rock
strata trends NE SW and dips 500 to 550 towards NW, whereas on the left bank the rock
3-7
strata trends almost in the same NE SW direction but dips 750 to 800 towards SE. It is
thus inferred that the anticline axis follows the course of the river in the power house area.
The major joint sets and the discontinuity data in both the northern and southern structural
blocks of the syncline have been separately recorded through scan line discontinuity
survey in the field and plotted on the rose diagram and stereonets, which have been shown
on the geological maps of the respective section. The field data of the scan line survey has
been given in Annexure 3.C.
Apart from these features, the rock units at certain places have been observed as crushed
and fractured which may represent the presence of certain features like the fault and shear
zones. However, no direct evidence of faulting could be seen in the field. For the
completeness of the study some faults and shears have been assumed along the deep
nallahs intersecting the power house and power tunnel route.
3.8 Geology of the Reservoir Area
The Jabori Hydropower scheme shall operate on runoff-river basis, therefore the reservoir
created by the weir shall be shallow and of limited area. The area up stream of the weir is
wide open with an island in the middle of the river valley. The reservoir area extends to a
distance of about 1.0 km up to the foot bridge of Giar Sacha village over Siran River. The
reservoir area is marked with the low level alluvial terraces on both the banks of the Siran
River with rock exposures at places. The reservoir area has been geologically mapped
using survey facilities and is presented as Figure-3.5.
In the reservoir area, the quartz mica schist rock unit is exposed at places along both the
banks in the form of small extent outcrops. These outcrops are protruding into the river
valley and also exist beyond the limit of low lying terraces towards hill face. The reservoir
upstream of the foot bridge becomes narrow and is flanked on both the banks by the rock
outcrops. There exist some agriculture terraces at higher level (nearly 10 m high above the
river) on the right bank of the Siran River.
It has been assessed in the field that the reservoir area is situated at quite low level as the
surrounding hills, beyond the alluvial terraces, rise abruptly to higher level (say 150 200
m) on each bank. Therefore, no chance of any leakage from the reservoir rim exists. The
rock faces close to the reservoir rim are of low to moderate height and dip towards the
downstream side. The topographic and geological conditions suggest that no appreciable
land slide shall occur in the reservoir area which may overtop or damage the weir structure.
In the reservoir area, immediately upstream of the weir axis, there exists a large old debris /
scree material originating from the right side nallahs. The debris flows have diverted the
river flows from right to the left side as shown in Figure-3.5 & 3.6. Although proper care
has been taken in the design of the weir structure, yet in case the slide gets reactivated in
future and similar quantities of mud flow invades the reservoir, then it may create some
problems for the stability of the weir structure or its proper functioning. To counter for this
situation, remedial measures like the gabions or the check dam has been proposed to be
constructed in the upstream reaches of the right bank nallahs.
3-8
3.9 Foundation Conditions at Weir Site and Appurtenant Structures
The foundation conditions of various structures have been evaluated on the basis of
Geological and structural features (including the joint / discontinuity data) prevailing at
various locations and also based on geotechnical assessment and interpretation of the
available data and laboratory test results. The details of the foundation conditions thus
evaluated are described below for each component of the Project.
3.9.1 Weir Site
The weir site has been selected about two km upstream of the Jabori town on the Siran
River. The area road passes along left bank well above (nearly 100 m) the weir site. The
Siran River flows in NW to SE direction at the weir site. The river valley is rather wide both
in the upstream and downstream directions. At the weir axis however, the valley becomes
narrow and is marked with the rock exposures on the left bank and the alluvial terraces on
the right bank. For the sake of economy this narrow valley section has been selected for the
placement of the weir axis (Plates-3.1 and 3.2)
It is mentioned here that in the weir site area, the river flows have been abruptly shifted from
the right to the left side upstream of the selected weir axis. The shift has been caused by
the inflow of rock debris coming from the right-side nallahs. Apparently the rock debris
originated from a rock-slide in the nallah and accumulated at its junction with the river
valley. The accumulation of rock debris has restricted the selection and placement of the
weir axis and special measures in the design had to be adopted for taking care of this
material.
The weir shall be a concrete gravity overflow type structure, about 85 m long with its crest
elevation 1385 m. The base of the weir shall be at elevation 1373 m. The floor of the stilling
basin shall be founded at elevation 1372 m. The overall height of the weir shall be 13 m.
The geological and geotechnical foundation conditions have been explored with the help of
geological mapping of the area, drilling of exploratory boreholes, geophysical survey and by
excavating test pits.
The weir site has been geologically mapped, picking up the rock outcrops and the
overburden materials. The geological map is presented in Figure-3.6. This map shows that
the weir site is dominantly occupied by the overburden of various origins forming the alluvial
and colluvial terraces. These terraces are generally under agriculture use. The rock
exposures are present only at a few places in the weir site area. The rock exposures
belonging to quartz mica schist of metamorphic origin are mainly present on the left bank of
the river generally covered with the overburden terraces under agriculture use. However, in
this area the rock exposures are quite clear up to the level of weir crest and the rock
extends both in the U/s and D/s side of the weir axis.
However, on the right bank of the river the rock exposures are scarce and observed only at
few places. One exposure is observed nearly 150 m up stream of the weir axis (i.e. in the
area of alternate axis) in front of the Island, where rock is exposed in the form of cliff along
the river edge. The other rock exposure is present in the area of Power Tunnel Intake area,
nearly 350 m down stream of the weir. The field evidence suggests that there is no rock out
crop along the river edge in a stretch of nearly 500 m on the right bank covering the U/s and
3-9
D/s areas of the weir axis (Plate-3.3). However, well exposed continuous rock outcrops are
observed well above the level (say 100m) of the river on the right bank, generally encircling
the agriculture terraces. The nallahs originating from these exposures bring significant
quantities of the rock debris and deposit these at the river edge in the form of small extent
sloping terraces into the river valley.
The rock exposed in the weir site area is the Quartz mica schist of metasedimentary origin.
The rock on the left abutment is moderately to thickly bedded, moderately strong to strong
and moderately jointed. However, the rock contains significant percentage of micaceous
material. Petrographic analysis of the surface rock samples and rock core samples from the
left bank (one sample) and right bank (02 samples) indicated that micaceous (muscovite
and biotite ) material ranging from 35 to 43 % and the quartz contents ranging between 48
to 55 %. The petrographic name assigned to these rock types are biotite quartz schist and
staurolite garnet mica schist details given in Table-3.6.1.
Subsurface rock conditions in the weir site area were explored through five (05) Nos of bore
holes. These bore holes were drilled to various depths on the left bank (one hole) and right
bank (04) holes. As shown in Table-3.1 & 3.2, in the river valley the drilled hole No. JWV
02 encountered bed rock at a depth of 17.5 m (elev. 1356.82 m), whereas on the right
abutment the hole No. JWR- 01 did not encounter bed rock up to drilled depth of 21.5 m
depth (Elev. 1362.15 m).
Also hole No. JWR- 05 located in the sand trap area did not encounted the bed rock upto 10
m depth at elev. 1366.59 m. On the left bank, the only drilled hole No. JWL-03 encountered
bed rock at 07.0m depth & 1379.86m elevation.The locations of all these holes are shown
on the Investigation Plan (Figure-3.3).
It is evident from the above description that in the left abutment area, the rock is
encountered at shallow depth for the placement of the weir body. Whereas on the right bank
the bed rock has not been encountered even to a deeper depth of more than 20 m.
Therefore the right abutment shall have to be tied in the alluvial / colluvial terrace consisting
of clayey silty gravel and boulder material. Special care to this aspect has been taken in the
design of the right abutment through providing the wrap around embankment. Similarly,
the bed rock in the river valley has been encountered at deeper depths; therefore the weir
body in the valley shall have to be placed on the river bed material comprising sandy gravel
boulder material. The pertinent details of the drilling are given in Tables-3.1 and 3.2.
The drilling has been done both in overburden and in the bed rock. Five (05) numbers of
boreholes were drilled in the weir site area which is occupied by the quartz mica schist rock
of metamorphic origin. Apparently the rock exposure present good rock conditions, being
moderately strong and medium to thickly bedded in nature. However the micaceous
contents in the rock dominate at places upto even 55 % (as discussed above). Probably
due to this reason, the average core recoveries in general remained in the range of 50% to
70%, which are considered rather on lower side. Similarly, the RQD could not be achieved
and maximum RQD found in few holes is up to 20%. The Lugeon values on the left bank
showed a value upto 10 Lu in hole No. JWL-03. In the river valley hole No JWV-02 indicated
a value ranging from 2 to 21 Lu in the rocky strata. Similarly on the right bank, the Lugeon
value ranged from 12 to 25 Lu.
3 - 10
In overburden material the permeabilities were determined through Constant Head method.
In the river valley hole No JWV-02, which encountered sandy gravel material, the k value
ranged between 1.0 e02 to 1.0 e06 cm/sec. The other holes drilled on the alluvial
terraces have k value ranged between 1.0 e -04 to 1.0 e -06. This shows that the silty /
clayey grave boulder material is characterized by the low permeability.
Artesian conditions were encountered at 24 m depth in 30 m deep hole No JWV-2 drilled at
the weir axis, located in the river valley close to the flowing river water. The hole was just
0.50 m above the then existing river water in March, 2009. This hole was started in the river
alluvium and the bed rock encountered at a depth of 17.5 m. The artesian pressure was
monitored for next 24 hrs, which stabilized at a height of 0.92 m above the ground elevation
of the hole. The technical data pertaining to these conditions is given below;
Hole No: JWV-1 ( drilled in the river valley at weir axis)
Ground elevation: 1374.32 m.
Depth at which artesian conditions were first encountered: 24.0m (elev. 1350.32 m)
Rise of water level above the ground elevation of hole: 0.92 m (Elev.1375.24 m)
( this was monitored for 24 hrs )
Final level of the artesian pressure: 1375.24 m.

Seepage analysis of the weir structure has been carried out to keep the gradients to
acceptable limits, reduce uplift pressures and to minimize the seepage losses. Different
options were studied however 1 m thick impervious blanket at the upstream of weir up to 30
m and 1 m thick graded filter of 15 m length at the downstream side beyond end sill is
suggested.
The discontinuity data interpreted in the form of Rose diagram for both the abutments is
shown below:
Discontinuity Data - Rose Diagram for Left Abutment Area
3 - 11
Discontinuity Data - Rose Diagram for Right Abutment Area
The geophysical survey (seismic refraction method)( was also conducted at the weir site
area. The locations of these profiles are shown in Figure-3.3, while the relevant details are
given in Table-3.3. The bed rock profiles as determined through this survey are used in
developing the conFigureuration of the bed rock in the structure area.
Besides, a few test pits have also been excavated for determining the nature of the
overburden material and for collection of soil samples; both bulk and block samples for
laboratory testing.
Based on the outcome of various investigations, the geological sections along and across
the weir axis has been prepared and shown in Figure-3.7. The geological and geotechnical
studies and investigations show the following findings;
The bedrock (quartz mica schist) is exposed in the left abutment area of the weir.
In the right abutment area, no bed rock has been encountered up to explored depth
of 21.5 m (elev. 1362. 15 m). The rock outcrop is not exposed even in the near
vicinity of the abutment. The weir abutment shall have to be tied in terrace material
and special measures have been adopted for this purpose.
In the river valley the bed rock has been encountered at 17.5 m depth (Elev.
1356.82 m). The weir body shall have to be placed on the river alluvium.
For seepage control measures 1 m thick impervious blanket at the upstream of weir
up to 30 m and 1 m thick graded filter of 15 m length at the downstream side beyond
end sill seems advisable.
3.9.2 Alternative Weir Site
As discussed above in section 3.9.1, since the bed rock is not present in the right abutment
area of the weir, neither the bed rock is encountered in the abutment hole No. JWR-1 up to
3 - 12
a depth of 21.5 m, it was considered advisable to look for an alternative location of the weir
axis. Consequently an alternative weir site was identified some 150 m U/s of the existing
weir axis as shown in the Geological plan and section developed along the weir axis in
Figure-3.8.
The alternative site has a merit of having well developed rock exposures on both the
abutments across the Siran river valley. The demerit however, is that the weir length at this
axis shall increase appreciably by about 50 %. This appears quite a costly option and the
alternate site has been dropped from further investigations. Only one hole No JWR 04
was drilled on the right abutment with 20 m depth, which has shown good rock conditions.
Besides a few geophysical profiles were also conducted along and across the weir axis.
However, this scheme was considered unfeasible and further works were deferred.
3.9.3 Conveyance Channel & Sand Trap Area
The appurtenant structures to the weir include the upstream conveyance channel from weir
to the sand trap structure and the downstream conveyance channel from sand trap to the
Power Tunnel Intake area. The route of the channel is aligned along the toe of the upper
terrace (Terrace -2) as shown in the Geological map Figure-3.9. A cut and cover reinforced
concrete conduit has been designed as the conveyance channel.
The route of the channel and the sand trap area has been investigated through geological
mapping as shown in Figure-3. 9. One borehole No. JWR 05 of 10 m depth (drilled in the
area of lower terrace) and 05 Nos of test pits along the route of the channel. Also three
geophysical profiles comprising two longitudinal (along the route) and one across the route
were also conducted. A geological section along the channel route has also been prepared
incorporating also the geophysical results to illustrate the sub surface lithological conditions.
This is presented in Figure-3.9.
The geological conditions as shown in the geological map and section along the
conveyance channel indicate that no rock exposures are present anywhere along the
channel alignment or its near vicinity. The channel area is occupied by the nullah debris
flow close to and down stream of the weir axis (Plate-3.4) and then up to the Power Tunnel
Intake with the upper terrace material. As a result of this, the middle section of the channel
shall pass through loose rock fragments (debris flow) from ch. 0+ 070 to 0+100 and the
remaining length of the channel shall pass through the clayey silty gravels and boulder
material with large rock blocks. In the sand trap area, the river bed material i.e. sandy gravel
shall be situated close to the foundation level as is indicated through test pit No TP-01.
Further in the D/s side of the sand trap, the channel route may encounter the clayey silty
gravels and boulder material with large rock blocks and the wet conditions while passing
through the terrace material.
3.10 Design of Power Facilities
The Power facilities include the intake portal, power tunnel, powerhouse and the tailrace
channel. The geological information and related data have been collected in the field and
each component evaluated on the basis of geological and geotechnical grounds. The
3 - 13
stability measures along the tunnel route were then determined which are discussed in this
section.
Four alternatives for the power facilities were considered for the selection of optimum route
of the power tunnel. Two alternatives with the option of having full length power tunnel and
the remaining two having surge shaft with penstock have been considered. This aspect has
been described in section 3.10.2.
3.10.1 Power Tunnel Intake Portal
It is situated at the end of the conveyance channel. The rock face is covered with a thin
veneer of slope wash / colluvial material comprising fallen rock fragments from the hill face
and choked in silty / clayey matrix. Therefore some excavation shall be required in
overburden and rock to reach the invert level of the portal (Plate-3.5).
The Intake Portal area shall be placed with its invert level at 1378.0 m and a cut and cover
concrete conduit shall lead into the Intake of the tunnel. This area has been investigated
through geological mapping, drilling one hole (No JP-01) to 25 m depth up to elevation
1355.13 m. The geological / tectonic set up of the area indicates that the Intake portal area
is situated in the southern limb of the syncline, while the synclinal axis passes very close to
this area. The synclinal axis passes through the area between sandtrap and the Intake
portal. The information collected in the field indicates that due to nearby passing tectonic
feature, the portal area is marked with a small extent face slide. The nearest rock exposed
at the surface and encountered in the borehole is the quartz mica schist. The rocks in the
borehole show poor core recovery generally up to 60 %, with RQD is also very poor with
value up to 20 %. The water pressure tests show a range of 24 to 37 Lu with one case
having only 7 Lu at the bottom of hole.
The discontinuity data interpreted in the form of Rose diagram is shown below:
Discontinuity Data - Rose Diagram of Intake Portal
3 - 14
The intake portal shall be temporary opening for the placement of the power conduit,
directed towards the power house outlet area and shall be backfilled after the placement of
the conduit. The rock cuts required for shorter period shall withstand without any problem
except minor slippage along the cut face which can be managed on temporary grounds. No
permanent treatment or the rock cuts shall be required after the completion of the works.
3.10.2 Design of Power Tunnel
3.10.2.1 Selection of Tunnel Route
Two alternatives each with two number of options were considered for the selection of the
power facilities. These are discussed below;
Alternative A This alternative scheme has its power house on the downstream
side of the Garanthali foot bridge. Further two options were considered; the Option
1 with the full length power tunnel leading directly to the power house and the
Option 2 with the shorter length of the tunnel and having open ( on surface)
penstocks leading to the power house. This alternative with both the options is
presented in Figure-3.11. The general view of the alternative is shown in Plate-3.6
and the view of the powerhouse area is shown in Plate-3.7.
Alternate - B This alternative scheme has its power house on the upstream side of
the Garanthali foot bridge. Further two options were considered ; the Option 1 with
the full length power tunnel leading directly to the power house and the other Option
2 with the shorter length of the tunnel and having open ( on surface) penstocks
leading to the power house. This alternative with both the options is presented in
Figure-3.12. The general view of the alternative is shown in Plate-3.8 and the view
of the powerhouse area is shown in Plate-3.9.
Comparison between all the four options was made for the selection of the most optimized
and economical alternative. As a consequence of this study, the Alternative -A with Option
2 has finally been selected as shown in Figure-3.11-A. The geological and geotechnical
studies have been described in detail for the recommended alternative; however studies for
the other alternatives have also been briefly described in this report.
The selected power tunnel of 3.0 m excavated diameter was analyzed and feasibility level
design has been made taking in to considerations the geological and geotechnical aspect of
the project. The significant features of the power tunnel are as follows:
Finished diameter = 2.0 m
Excavated diameter = 2.8 m (Assumed as 3.0 m in design)
Length of power tunnel = 1060 m
Minimum Rock cover over power tunnel > 2 D where D is tunnel diameter (m)
Maximum Rock cover over power tunnel ~ 350 m
3 - 15
Main lithological units encountered along this tunnel route are broadly classified in
typical lithic sections, Rock mass properties have been established following
various systems like Rock Structure Rating (RSR) By Wickham et al (1972), Rock
Mass Rating (RMR) By Bieniawski (1989) and Bartons Q method of Norwegian
Geotechnical Institute (NGI) 1974, 1993) using standard guidelines for each system.
The discontinuity data was analyzed for determining the optimum orientations of the
power tunnel with regards to the structural geology using Dips V 5.0 software by
Rocscience. Keeping in view the results of all above mentioned methods and
applying Engineering judgment, the adequate support system of power tunnel has
been recommended.
3.10.2.2 Lithology and Structure
The surface geology related to the design of the tunnel is described in this section. It is also
pointed out that the intake portal area and the Tunnel route are located in the southern
block of the syncline, which passes just upstream of the intake portal area.
The tunnel route has been divided into various lithological sections based on the interpreted
and extended geology to the level of the tunnel. The following lithic / rock units shall be
encountered in each section along the route of the tunnel. The general description of the
rock / lithic units is given in Section 3.7.1.
Section I Length 296 m - (Ch. 0+000 to Ch. 0+296 m) The tunnel shall pass
through the metamorphic rocky strata the quartz mica schist (80%) with
quartizitic lenses (20%). The rock description is given in Section 3.7.1.
Section II Length 186 m - (Ch. 0+296 to 0+482 m) The tunnel shall pass through
the rock strata comprising the Quartzite (70 %) with quartz mica schist
(30%).
Section III Length 520 m - (Ch. 0+482 to 0+1002 m) This section of the tunnel route
shall encounter alternate beds of white grey Marble approximately 70 %
with Quartz mica schist (30 %).
Section IV Length 58 m - (Ch. 0+ 1002 to 1+060 m) The tunnel shall encounter

alternating bed of quartz mica schist (70%) and marble (30%).
3.10.2.3 Penstock (Section V)
The penstock of length 511.0 m starts from (Ch. 1+060) right after the power tunnel and
from (Ch. 1+060 1+ 120m) it passes through rocky strata of alternative beds of quartz
mica schist (70%) and marble (30%) and from (Ch. 1+120 to 1+520 m) it passes through
cultivated terrace which comprises of gravels, boulder, cobbles and clay etc. From Ch.
1+520 to power house penstock pass through rocky strata of slats which are moderately
strong and highly jointed and fractured.
It is anticipated that the ground water shall be encountered all along the tunnel route as is
indicated by information of bore hole JP-01 (in the intake portal area), JP-04 (in power
house area) where ground water table has been encountered at 1367.13 m and 1262.42 m
3 - 16
respectively. Also there exist numerous springs in the surrounding area of the tunnel
alignment.
3.10.2.4 Tunnel orientation Vs major structural features
The principal geologic structures that can influence the sitting, design, and construction of
the tunnel system include the trend of the rock strata, nature of the contacts between
different rock types, the fault / shear zones and the orientation of the major joint system.
The stability of the underground openings like the tunnels will depend on the orientation of
the lithological units and the rock discontinuities, frequency and characteristics of rock
discontinuities, rock stresses and groundwater conditions encountered during construction.
Regarding the geology of the tunnel it is observed that the lithic units in general dip towards
upstream side of the power tunnel i.e. against the dip of the strata - towards intake portal.
The power tunnel shall pass through lithologic units mostly at right angle or an angle slightly
oblique to the dip direction of these units; which is considered favorable. This has been
shown in the composite Rose Diagram shown below. This diagram has been constructed
taking into account all the structural data collected in the field in terms of the bedding /
foliation of the rocks and other discontinuities (major joint system) etc. The trend of the
tunnel alignment has also been plotted on this diagram. However at places the tunnel will
be aligned almost parallel to the major joint systems which will cause problems and shall
require special support system during construction.
Composite Rose diagram shows strikes of bedding / foliation planes and discontinuities
together with the alignment of power tunnel.
The structural features along with the foliation / schistocity of the rock units have been
presented in the form of rose diagrams and stereonets plotted and shown along with the
tunnel alignment at the respective places along the tunnel route in the Geological Map
(Figure-3.10).
3 - 17
3.10.2.5 Design Considerations
For the ease of study and design of 1060 m long power tunnel, the tunnel route has been
divided into three major divisions having similar lithilogies and almost identical geological
and geotechnical characteristics. These are termed here as typical cases and are
described below. It is pointed out that a typical case does not necessarily cover the full
range of rockmass category instead it may contain some percentage of the other typical
cases.
Typical Case 1 - This includes all the sections of the tunnel where quartz mica schist
dominates i.e. present up to 80 % and other lithic units like quartzite, marble etc. are up to
20%. These rocks as described in Section 3.7.1 are thinly to moderately thick and
moderately to highly foliated. It is anticipated that these rocks shall behave as rather weak
rocks in tunneling and shall require special treatments for stabilization. This case includes
the Lithic Sections I, IV, V & VI described above.
Typical Case 2 - In this typical case marble and quartzite dominate over the quartz mica
schist. The engineering behavior will be controlled by the dominating material like marble
and quartzite. These rock units are medium to thickly bedded and are medium strong to
strong in nature as described in section 3.7.1. The field observations indicate that these
rock units can be classified in fair to good rockmass type. Therefore this typical case shall
have 70% fair and 30% good rock mass. This case includes Sections II & III described
above.
Typical case 3- Case 3 applies to the tunnel sections involving faults, shears, gougic
material, brectiated, fractured zones and the squeezing rock zones. Although very ittle
direct evidence of these features could be observed in the field, probably due to fact that
most of the area is covered with overburden, scree and cultivated terraces, yet for the
completeness of the study it has been assumed that the very poor rock types consisting of
1 to 10m wide sheared or crushed zones may be encounterd along the tunnel route at some
places. For assessment purpose, a total length of about 100 m along whole of the tunnel
length has been allocated for this typical case. This case has been evaluated only on the
basis of RMR system.
3.10.2.6 Rock Support System
The tunnel excavated diameter shall be about 3 m. For such diameter the full head
excavation through drilling and blasting method seems most favorable and economical.
Rock Mass Parameters
The assessment of rock mass parameters and required support system is based on field
investigations like geological mapping, geotechnical evaluations, discontinuity data
interpretation and laboratory test results etc. and applying the empirical methods like RSR,
RMR and Q-System of Rock Mass Classification (described below). However the final
recommendation for stabilization measures and support systems has been recommended
on the basis of Consultants best judgment taking in to consideration the existing natural
conditions in the Project area.
3 - 18
Support Estimation by Rock Mass Classification
Preliminary estimates and checks of the likely support requirements were performed on the
basis of the RSR by Wickham et al, RMR by Beineaski and NGI Q-System, Barton et al.,
1974 / Grimstad and Barton, 1993).
The results obtained through the above mentioned three rating systems are described
below.
3.10.2.7 Rock Structural Rating (RSR) By Wickham et al (1972)
The first approximation of project tunnel support is based on the empirical criterion of rock
support recommended by Wickham et al (1972).
Currently only two typical cases have been considered and evaluated for the purpose of
rock conditions assessment and evaluation of the support system. These typical cases are:
Typical Case 1: (This applies to Tunnel Sections I, IV & V)
The Tunnel sections dominated by the quartz mica schist alone or having inter - layers of
quartzite and / or marble beds ranging up to 20 %. The RSR system used for the evaluation
and categorization is based on the following three rock parameters:
Parameter A - Geology: Taking into account the rock type origin, hardness and the
structure, the categorized values shows that the quartz mica schist with quartizitic lenses
fall in type 3 of the metamorphic origin and is classified as slightly folded or faulted with
selected numerical value 18.
Parameter B - Geometry: Effect of discontinuity pattern with respect to direction of tunnel

on the basis of joint spacing, joint orientation and tunnel drive. The numerical value is
selected as 16 against the closely jointed but with perpendicular strike to the major joint
direction.
Parameter C - Effect of Ground water and joint condition: A value of moderate inflow
of 200 to 1000 Gpm / 1000 ft length of tunnel. A numerical value of 7 is designated to this
parameter.
Thus RSR value = A+B+C = 18+16+7 = 41
For the evaluation of support system the RSR guidelines have been used which gives the
following support system for this typical case 1.
Shortcrete 3.5 inches (say 90 to 100 mm) thick,
Rock bolts 1 inch dia spaced at 3 ft (say 1 m)
Steel ribs (8 WF 31 i.e. 8 inch deep wide flange I Section weighing 31 pound per foot)
at spacing of 5 feet (say 1.5 m) can be used as an alternate to rock bolts option.
3 - 19
Typical Case 2: (This applies to Tunnel Sections II & III)
The Tunnel sections dominated by the quartzite or marble beds (up to 70 %) with thin inter
layers of quartz mica schist (30 %). The RSR system used for the evaluation and
categorization is based on the same three rock parameters:
Parameter A, Geology:
The rock conditions evaluation shows that these sections consist of quartzite (60 %) with
quartz mica schist (40%) and marble (up to 70%) with quartz mica schist (up to 30%). Both
these sections fall in type 3 of metamorphic origin and is classified as slightly folded or
faulted (18) to massive (24) with average selected numerical value 21.
Parameter B, Geometry:
The numerical value is selected as 32 against moderate to blocky class but with
perpendicular strike to the major joint direction.
Parameter C, Effect of Ground water and joint condition:
A value of moderate inflow of 200 to 1000 Gpm / 1000 ft length of tunnel. A numerical value
of 16 is designated to this parameter.
Thus RSR value = A+B+C = 21+32+16 = 69
Shortcrete 2.0 inches (say 50 mm) thick,
Rock bolts 1 inch dia. spaced at 7 ft (say 2 m)
3.10.2.8 Rock Mass Rating (RMR) By Bieniawski (1989)
The RMR system is based on the evaluation of following six parameters:
1. Uniaxial Compressive Strength of rock mass

2. Rock Quality Designation RQD
3. Spacing of the joints / discontinuities
4. Condition of joints / discontinuities
5. Ground water conditions
6. Orientation of joints / discontinuities
Assessment of the Rock Mass Class
The evaluation of the above mentioned parameters for Jabori power tunnel has been made
in accordance with the guidelines of the Bieniawski 1989 system. According to this the
results obtained are as follows
Typical Case 1: (This applies to Tunnel Sections I, IV & V)
The evaluation of the parameters and the selected rating for each parameter is given below;
3 - 20
Evaluation and Selected Ratings
Rating
Parameter Value
UCS (MPa)
25 - 50 4
(assumed)
RQD (%)
25 50 8
( assumed )
Spacing of
discontinuities 60 - 200 8
(mm)
Condition of Slightly rough, separation
discontinuities < 1 mm, Highly 20
weathered walls
Ground water
Dripping 4
condition
Orientation of -3
Favorable to Fair
discontinuities
Total 41
The RMR value of 41 indicates that the rock mass in tunnel section No I, IV, & V lie on the
boundary line between fair rock (41 60) to poor rock (21-40). Remaining on the
conservative side it is suggested that the tunnel sections mentioned above should be
treated as at the upper level of the poor rock mass class.
Required Support System
The required support system has been assessed using the guidelines given by Bieniawski
(1989) reproduced below.
Recommended RMR Support System
Rock Rock bolts (20 mm dia Shotcrete Steel Sets

Excavation
Category fully grouted)
Systematic bolts 4 m 50 100 mm in None
Fair rock long, spaced 1.5 2.0 m crown and 30
Full face
RMR: 41-60 in crown and walls with mm in walls.
wire mesh in crown only.
Systematic bolts 4-5 m 100 150 mm in Light to medium ribs
Poor rock long, spaced 1.0 1.5 m crown and 100 spaced 1.5 m where
Full face
RMR: 21-40 in crown and walls with mm in walls. required.
wire mesh in crown only.
Typical Case 2: (This applies to Sections II & III)
The evaluation of the parameters and the selected rating for each parameter are given
below
Selected RMR Ratings for Each Parameter
Rating
Parameter Value
UCS (MPa)
50 - 100 7
( assumed)
RQD (%)
50 75 13
( assumed)
Spacing of
60 - 200 8
discontinuities (mm)
3 - 21
Condition of
Slightly rough, separation < 1 mm,
discontinuities 20
Highly weathered walls
Ground water condition Dripping 4
Orientation of
Favorable -2
discontinuities
Total 50
The RMR value of 50 as established from the above table indicates that the rock mass in
tunnel section No II & III lie in the fair rock (41 60) class.
(1989) reproduced below.
Rock Rock bolts (20 mm Shotcrete Steel Sets

Excavation
Category dia fully grouted)
Systematic bolts 4 50 100 mm None
Fair rock m long, spaced 1.5 in crown and
RMR: 41- Full face 2.0 m in crown 30 mm in
60 and walls with wire walls.
mesh in crown.
Typical Case 2A: (This applies partly to Sections II & III)
For the Typical case 2, it is anticipated that about 30 % of the rock type in this class may
have better rock conditions as evaluated in above Section. Thus making its class slightly
superior than that of Typical Case 2. Its details are given below;
Evaluation and Selected RMR - Ratings
Parameter Value Rating
UCS (MPa)
100 - 200 12
(assumed)
RQD (%)
50 75 13
( assumed )
Spacing of
discontinuities 0.30 1.0 20
(m)
Condition of Slightly rough,
discontinuities separation < 1 mm, 20
Hard joint wall rock
Ground water Moist only
7
condition Interstitial water
Orientation of
Favorable -2
discontinuities
Total 70
The RMR guidelines suggest a high ranking to this rating (i.e. 70) and have placed this rock
mass into the category of Good rock class (RMR rating 61 80).
3 - 22
(1989).

Excavation
Locally, bolts in 50 mm in None
Good rock crown 3 m long, crown where
RMR: 61- Full face spaced 2.5 m with required.
80 occasional wire
mesh.
Typical Case 3 (RMR < 20):
This section applies to tunnel areas which may encounter fault / shear zones with gougic
material, bractiated / fracturaed zones and the squeezing rock conditions. A total length of
nearly 100 m has been assumed for this rock mass along the full length of the tunnel.
It is assumed that the very poor rock conditions consisting of the about 1m to 10m wide
sheared or crushed zones may cross the tunnel at various intervals. It is also assumed that
there may be fault zones of about 5 - 10 m width in the tunnel route area. Also the contact
between various lithic units like the quartz mica schist with quartzite and marble beds may
present weaker rock conditions.
The RMR value of <20 as assumed for this case indicating that the rock mass in these
tunnel sections lie in the very poor rock class.
(1989)

Excavation
Multiple drifts 0.5- Systematic bolts 5-6 m 150 200 mm in Medium to heavy
1.5m advance in long, spaced 1.0-1.5 m crown, 150 mm ribs spaced 0.75m
top heading. Install in crown and walls with in sides and 50 with steel lagging
Very poor
support wire mesh. Bolt invert. mm on face. and forepoling if
rock
concurrently with required. Close
RMR: < 20
excavation. invert.
(assumed)
Shortcrete as soon
as possible after
blasting.
3.10.2.9 Bartons Q System Rock tunneling Quality Index (1974, 1993)
This system is considered to be a function of three major parameters given below:
1. Block size (RQD/J n ) representing the structure of the rock mass and a measure of
particle size.
3 - 23
2. Interblock shear strength (J r /J 0 ) represents the roughness and friction

characteristics of the joint walls or filling material.
3. Active stresses (J w /SRF) represents the stress field within and outside the rock
mass in tunnels.
The Numerical value of the Index Q is defined by the following equation
Q = (RQD/J n ) (J r /J 0 ) (J w /SRF)
Taking into consideration the above mentioned parameters for the rock mass encountered
along Jabori power tunnel, the two typical cases have been evaluated below.
Typical Case 1: (This applies to Sections I, IV & V)
The values for various parameters for the rock mass along the tunnel sections mentioned
above have been evaluated using the guidelines for the classification of individual
parameter used in the tunnelling Quality Index Q.
The selected values of various parameters for this typical case are enlisted below:
Evaluation and Selected Q-System Ratings
Sr. No. Value

Parameter / Description
RQD (%)
1
B: Poor (assumed) 25-50
Joint set Number (Jn)
2
E: Two joint sets plus random 6
Joint Roughness Number (Jr)
3
F: Smooth planar 1.0
Joint alteration number (Ja)
E: Softening or low friction clay coating,
4
i.e. mica, chloride, talc, gypsum and 4.0
graphite etc.
Joint water reduction (Jw)
5 A: Dry excavation or minor inflow i.e. < 5 1.0
lit/minute locally
Stress Reduction Factor (SRF)
(C: Squeezing rock, plastic flow of
6 incompetent rock under influence of high 5-10
rock pressure) (Selected 7)
N: Mild squeezing rock pressure
Inserting the selected values for various parameters from the above table in to the equation
Q = (RQD/J n ) (J r /J 0 ) (J w /SRF)
Q classification estimates are found to range between Q = 0.15 (for 25% RQD) and Q =
0.30 (for 50% RQD) both values fall in the very poor category of rock mass class, as shown
in the graphic Chart reproduced here from the guidelined of the Q- System.
(The Equivalent Dimension (D e ) of an excavation diameter of 3 m using Excavation Support

Ratio (ESR) of 1.6 is 1.9. The shaded area in red represents a range of support for the
Jabori power tunnel based on this system for the typical case 1)
3 - 24
Recommended Q Support System
Figure-3: Estimated support categories based on tunneling quality index Q (Afte Broch,
2006)
The maximum unsupported span using the following equation comes out to be 1.5 to 2.0 m.
Maximum span (Unsupported) = 2ESR Q0.4
(Where ESR value for the permanent opening for hydropower tunnel is assumed as 1.6)
Support requirement for Q method in this case as per graphic Chart above is as
follows;
Shotcrete 50-90 mm thick with meshing (Reinforced)
Bolt spacing in shotcrete area from 1.3 to 1.5 m
The length L of rockbolts is estimated from the equation
L = (2+0.15B)/ESR
(Where B is the excavated width (3m) and ESR value determined above is 1.6)
The rockbolt length thus determined is 1.5 m.
Typical Case 2: (This applies to Tunnel Sections II & III)
The values for various parameters for the rock mass along the tunnel sections mentioned
above have been evaluated using the guidelines for classification of individual parameters
used in the tunnelling Quality Index Q.
The selected values of various parameters for this typical case are enlisted below:
3 - 25
Evaluation and Selected Q-System Ratings
Sr. No. Value

Parameter / Description
RQD (%)
1
C: Fair ( assumed) 50-75
Joint set Number (J n )
2 E: Two joint sets plus random
6
Joint Roughness Number (J r )
3
B: Rough undulating 3.0
Joint alteration number (J a )
E: Softening or low friction clay coating, i.e.
4
Mica, chloride, talc, Gypsum and Graphite 4.0
etc.
Joint water reduction (J w )
5 A: Dry excavation or minor inflow i.e. < 5
lit/minute locally 1.0
Stress Reduction Factor (SRF)
C: Single weakness zone containing clay
6
(excavation depth > 50m) 2.5
Inserting the selected values for various parameters from the above table in to the equation
Q = (RQD/J n ) (J r /J 0 ) (J w /SRF)
Q classification estimates are found to range between Q = 2.50 (for 50% RQD) and Q =
3.75 (for 75% RQD) both values fall in the upper limit of poor category near the border of
Fair rock mass class, using the graphic Chart given below
(Equivalent Dimension (D e ) of an excavation diameter of 3 m using Excavation Support
Ratio (ESR) of 1.6 is 1.9. The shaded area in red (Figure-3) or attached Figure-3 represents
a range of support for the Jabori power tunnel based on this system for the typical case 2).
Recommended Q Support System
Reproduced from Palmstrom and Broch, 2006)
The maximum unsupported span using the following equation comes out to be 4.5 to 5.5 m.
3 - 26
Maximum span (Unsupported) = 2ESR Q0.4
(Where ESR value for the permanent opening for hydropower tunnel is assumed as 1.6)
Support requirement for Q method in this case is described below:
The support system as defined in the above guidelines is as follows:
Bolt spacing 1.5 in unshortcreted area
The length L of rockbolts is estimated from the equation
L = (2+0.15B)/ESR
(Where B is the excavated width (3m) and ESR value determined above is 1.6)
The rockbolt length thus determined is 1.5 m.
3.10.2.10 Comparison of different rating methods for support systems
Preliminary rock support requirements for the Jabori power tunnel by using different
methods is as given below in Tables. For the Typical case 3 refer to Sections 3.10.2.7.
Comparison of Rock Tunnel Support Evaluated through Various Methods
(Typical case 1 - applicable to tunnel sections I, IV & V
RSR *RMR Method

Support Q Method
Method Fair rock mass Poor rock mass
Shot crete 50-100 in 100-150 in

50-90 with
(mm) crown crown
90-100 meshing /
and and
reinforced
30 in walls 100 in walls
Systematic Systematic
bolts 4 m bolts 4-5 m
long spaced long spaced
25 mm dia 1.5 m long spaced
Rock bolts 1.5 2.0 m in 1.0 1.5 m in
spaced 1.0 in shot crete area
crown and crown and
m from 1.3 to 1.7 m
walls, with walls, with wire
wire mesh in mesh in crown
crown only only
8 WF 31 Light to
Spacing medium ribs
1.5 m. spaced 1.5 m
Steel Ribs / Can be where required.
None None
sets used as
alternate
to rock bolt
option.
3 - 27
Comparison of Rock Tunnel Support evaluated through Various Methods
(Typical Case 2; applicable to tunnel sections II & III)
RMR Method
Support RSR Method Q Method
(Fair rock mass)
Shotcrete
50-100 in crown
(mm) 50-55
and None
(2 inches)
30 in walls
1.5 m long
Systematic bolts 4 m
25 mm dia spaced at 1.5
Rock bolts long spaced 1.5 2.0 m
spaced 2.0 m m in
in crown and walls, with
(7ft) unshotcreted
wire mesh in crown only
area
Steel Ribs /
None None None
sets
3.10.2.11 Consultants Recommendation of the Support System
The comparison of various support systems using all the three in practice classification
systems i.e. RSR, RMR and Q - method are shown in above Tables which to much extent
match with each other and no major difference has been noted.
However, the Consultants based upon their experience and keeping in view the overall rock
conditions observed at site; particularly the micaceous and squeezing nature of the country
rocks and the rather smaller excavated diameter (3 m) of the tunnel have tried to arrive at
reasonable and economical support system described below for each of the typical case of
power tunnel.
Typical Case 1 (Tunnel sections I, IV & V)
Shotcrete 50-100 mm with meshing / reinforced in crown and 50 mm in walls. It is

anticipated that the mica rich parts may require thicker shotcrete (120 mm) with wire
mesh in crown.
Rock bolts 32 mm dia 2.5 m long fully grouted at spacing 1.0 m in mica rich rock units
and 1.5 m in other rock types both in crown and walls.
Steel ribs light to medium (8 WF 31) spaced at 1.5 m in areas of shear zones and
weathered micaceous rock units. Also this support may be required where rock fall or
wedge failure is anticipated.
Typical Case 2 (Tunnel sections II & III)
Shotcrete 50-100 mm with meshing / reinforced in crown and 30 mm in walls. It is

anticipated that the mica rich parts may require thicker shotcrete (120 mm) with wire
mesh in crown.
3 - 28
Rock bolts 32 mm dia 2.5 m long fully grouted at spacing 1.5 m both in crown and
walls.
Steel ribs light to medium (8 WF 31) spaced at 1.5 m where required. This may be
required in areas of shear zones and weathered micaceous rock units. Also this
support may be required where rock fall or wedge failure is anticipated in areas
dominated by marble and quartzite.
Typical Case 3 (RMR < 20)
Shotcrete 200 mm with meshing / reinforced in crown, 150 mm in sides and 50 mm

on each temporary face.
Rock bolts 32 mm dia 2.5m long fully grouted at spacing 1 m both in crown and
walls.
Steel ribs medium to heavy (8 WF 48) spaced at 0.75 m with steel lagging and fore
poling if required. Close invert in case of upheaval of bottom.
3.10.3 Powerhouse & Tailrace Channel
The surface Powerhouse shall be located at the end of the tunnel, where the tunnel
emerges out of the relatively flat terraces, about 100 m downstream of the local foot bridge
on the River Siran in Garanthali area. The area downstream of the bridge is dominantly
occupied by the low level alluvial terrace nearly 70100 m wide. These terraces are limited
towards hill face by the higher terraces forming an escarpment face all along the toe of the
upper terrace. The powerhouse shall be constructed at the toe of the upper terraces.
The powerhouse and tailrace area has been investigated through geological mapping,
drilling of two numbers of boreholes (JP-3 and JP-4), test pits and the geophysical profiling.
The geological plan for the powerhouse is shown in Figure-3.13 and the section is shown in
Figure-3.14. The permeability values in overburden range between 1.0 e -04 to 1.0 e -06
cm/sec while the bed rock (Slates) showed Lugeon value ranging up to 5.
The geological mapping and other investigations show that rock crops out as sporadic
exposures in the lower alluvial terraces, but has almost continuous exposures along the toe
of the upper terrace. The rock exposures belong to slate which is relatively less
metamorphosed and strong in nature. The drill hole in the Power house area JP-4
encountered bed rock at a depth of 9.7 m (elev. 1264.0 m), while the one drilled in the area
of tail race encountered bed rock at 10.5 m depth (elevation 1247.61 m).
The foundation of the power house structure shall be at elevation 1249.3 m. Therefore it is
assessed that about 25 m deep excavation in overburden and rocky strata shall be required
to reach the foundation level. About half of the excavation (say 12 m) shall be in the
overburden comprising the terrace material under agriculture use, while the second half
shall be in the rocky strata. The rock is competent in nature and its trend shall be inside the
hill face i.e. opposite to the direction of the cut faces. Therefore little problem regarding the
3 - 29
stability of the cut slope is envisaged here. However, the ground water level established
through Hole JP-4 is at elevation 1262.4 m, which shows that the excavations shall be
mainly under groundwater conditions and shall require adequate dewatering system and
special measures during excavations to maintain the stability of the slopes.
The tailrace channel area mainly occupies the alluvial terrace material with scattered
outcrops of slatey rock. The subsurface conditions have been investigated through bore
hole JP-3. This hole encountered bed rock at 10.5 m depth at elevation 1247.6 m. The
bottom level of the channel shall be at elevation around1250 m. It is therefore anticipated
that generally the channel shall be excavated through overburden material of lower terrace,
which is composed of river alluvium. However, some rock excavations are required to
remove the scattered outcrops and near the bottom of the channel. It is also likely that the
bottom of the channel shall dominantly be in the overburden material. The tailrace channel
shall join the River Siran at a favorable angle created by the natural bend in the river
course.
3.11 Construction Materials
The Project area and its near vicinity has been reconnoitered for the availability of various
types of construction materials required for the construction of the Project. This study has
been carried out keeping both the aspects in view i.e. the materials expected to be available
at site as a product of require excavation and also the borrow material sources in the near
vicinity of the Project area. Also information from the local market in Mansehra was
gathered regarding the available sources of the materials under use by the locals and the
contractors etc. This section of the report gives a brief account of this study.
3.11.1 Information from the local (Mansehra) market
The construction material market of Mansehra city, which is the nearest sizable market to
the Project area was also checked to get the first hand information about the sources of
different materials being used by locals and the Government Contractors. The information
thus gathered is summarized below;
Local information about the sources of concrete aggregate indicates that no material from
the local source is available in the market. The crushed rock and gravels are being procured
from Havelian (Dhor Nallah crush) nearly 45 km from Mansehra, Garhi Habib - uallah (30
km) and from Gandhi Nala (20 km) from Mansehra. Similarly, no local sand source is
available and the only sand in the market comes from Lawrancepur nearly 120 km from
Mansehra.
This information shows that the Project area as well as whole of Mansehra area is in deficit
of suitable concrete materials and the construction industry has to depend on the outside
sources. It has also been observed that the contractor working on the construction of the
road from Shinkiari to Jabori is also using the Lawrancepur sand for concrete.
3.11.2 Concrete Aggregate Materials
Almost all the major structures at site like the weir, the sand trap, conveyance conduits and
Power house etc shall be built in concrete. Further, the pressure tunnel shall be concrete
3 - 30
lined for its full length. Therefore the emphasis has been given to the study of potential
sources of the coarse and fine concrete aggregates. In this regards, both the sources
coming from the required excavations at the Project and the borrow sources have been
studied and are described below;
3.11.3 Required Excavation
The materials available from the required excavations shall mainly come from the
excavations of weir foundation in the Siran river bed, the left abutment, the Intake portal
areas and the excavation of the tunnels. However, it is noted that the bulk of the
excavations shall come from the metamorphic rock - the quartz mica schists, quartzites and
the marbles. All these materials are considered weaker rocks and containing appreciable
percentage of micas and other deleterious materials not suitable for the concrete
aggregates as defined by the Petrographic analysis of the rocks ( reference Report on
Petrographic analysis of the Project area rocks). Therefore, it is anticipated that generally
the materials from the required excavations shall not be suitable for the purpose of concrete
aggregate. Also there does not exist any specific source of the fine aggregate (sand) at or
near the site. The river bed material at places possesses small pockets of sand currently
being used to meet the local demand. Consequently, the sources other than that present at
site have been identified and studied as the borrow material sources described below;
3.11.4 Potential Sources for Concrete Materials
3.11.4.1 The Coarse Aggregates in the Project Area
The Project area is situated amongst the domain of metamorphosed rocks comprising the
quartz mica schists, quartzites and the marbles with the intrusive bodies of granite and
doleritic / diabasic of igneous origin. The injected bodies are present as thin subordinate
dykes and sills (a few meter thick only) into the country rock. The Siran River bed material
also comprises the materials of metamorphic origin (schists and gneisses) with some minor
constituents of igneous origin (granites and dolerite etc).
The country rocks giving rise to the river bed materials of Siran River have been
petrographically analyzed. The results are summarized in Table-3.6.1. The results indicate
that almost all the rock types belonging to the metamorphic group contain micaceous
contents ranging from 30 to 52 % and the strained quartz 2 to 20 %. Both these materials
have been considered as unsuitable and deleterious to the concrete aggregate when used
with Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC). Two samples from the river bed material one each
from weir site and Powerhouse area have been collected and tested in the laboratory to
check its suitability as concrete materials. The study has indicated that the rock types
constituting the river bed material are weak in nature and contain appreciable amount of
deleterious materials. Therefore the river bed material as such cannot safely be used as
concrete materials.
3.11.4.2 Borrow Sources of the Coarse Aggregate
The most suitable and promising sources being used in the construction industry are
described in brief below;
3 - 31
Oghi (Mansehra) Aggregate Source
This source is situated at a distance of nearly 10 to 15 km from Mansehra and 60 65 km

from the Jabori site along the Mansehra Oghi road in Susal Gali and Khaki areas. The
source of the material is the doleritic dykes and sills of basic igneous origin injected into the
Mansehra Granite batholith. The doleritic material is being crushed at a number of places to
meet the local requirements. The doleritic material is dark grey to black in color, very dense
with high specific gravity and is very hard to hard in nature. The initial assessment of the
deposit indicates that this source can be used as potential source of the coarse aggregates.
Abbottabad Limestone
There exist large extent and promising source of coarse aggregates in the vicinity of
Abbottabad along Nathiagali road nearly 80 km from the Project site. The aggregates
consists of Margala Limestone which is the extension of the Margala hills of Hasanabdal
and Islamabad. Currently this is being locally exploited. This is an established source of
materials and can be used as a better and reliable alternative source for the coarse
aggregate for the Jabori Project.
Havelian Aggregate
The Havelian crush is being produced from the Dhor Nalla bed material and is a promising
source of concrete material meeting the local requirement of Abbottabad and Mansehra
area. However, the material is generally of metamorphic origin of slatey rocks, which is
weaker in nature and may not be suitable for the construction of Jabori Project.
Suthan Gali Doleritic Material
The geological knowledge of the Project area indicates that there exists the possibility of
occurrence of thick injected bodies of doleritic nature in the area about 20 to 25 km
upstream of the Jabori site towards the Suthan Gali area. Therefore the Suthan Gali area
can be searched for the location and identification of such promising igneous bodies, which
can be a better and nearer source of the course aggregate.
3.11.5 Fine aggregate (Sand) Source
As also described earlier, sand sources in the vicinity of the site and in Mansehra area have
been identified during the course of studies. However, the studies have revealed that these
sources are of fine grained nature and contain appreciable percentage of micaceous
material and of limited extent. Consequently, the alternate sources out side Mansehra area
have also been identified and studied. The studied sources are described below;
3.11.5.1 Local (Mansehra Area) Sand Sources
The following sand sources are located in the vicinity of Mansehra area, which were
identified and studied;
Jaba Farooq Khan Sand Source. The potential sources of sand have been found
in Jaba Farooq Khan village, occring nearly 15 km west of Mansehra city and
3 - 32
nearly 65 km from the Jabori site. The sand deposit occurs on both the banks of the
Siran river. This area has been investigated through one test pit excavated to a
depth of nearly 3 m for the collection of sand sample.
This sand source is grey and fine grained in nature with appreciable percentage of
micaceous materials, which may be undesired for the performance of the concrete.
The approximate dimensions of this deposit are 100 m X 150 m and the investigated depth
is 3.0m. Apparently this sand source has not been considered suitable as concrete material.
Shahzeb Lake ( Kuliga village) Sand source
This sand deposit is situated about 12 km in the south of Project site, on the left bank of
Siran River. The sand is light grey, fine grained and micaceous in nature. The approximate
extent of this deposit as investigated in the field is 30 m x 50 m with 3 m depth. This sand
source has not been considered promising.
Manda Guchha Sand Source
This sand source is present in the Siran River bed about 15 km upstream of the weir site
near the village Manda Guchha. The road leading to this village is under construction and
metalled access shall be available in the near future. This sand deposit is grey, fine to
medium grained with trace coarse fraction and is micaceous in nature.
The sand is present as scattered pockets of 20 m x 30 m size in the river bed and rarely
some continuous exposure is available. Therefore, only limited quantities shall be available
from this source. The ERRA Division has approved this sand for use in the construction of
buildings in this area. However, this source may not be suitable for the construction of large
structures like that of Jabori Project, which requires vast quantities of sand material.
3.11.5.2 Borrow Sand Sources
Lawrancepur Sand ( Hassanabdal)
As discussed above (section 3.11.1), the local market in Mansehra is using the
Lawrancepur sand for its use. The road contractor currently busy in the construction of local
Jabori road is also using sand from Lawrancepur. Therefore, sand from this source may
have to be used for the Project.
The Lawrancepur sand source near Hasanabdal is situated at a distance of nearly 150 km
from the Jabori site. This is an established and approved source and the sand deposit has
been studied in details by numerous agencies and has been used in mega Projects like
Tarbela and recently completed Ghazi Barotha Project. Therefore no problem is foreseen in
the use of this sand source for Jabori Project.
Thakot ( Dandai ) Sand deposit
This sand source is situated about 100 km in the NW of the Project site, along KKH on the
right bank of Indus River in Thakot / Dandai villages. The KKH passes through this large
deposit extending some 4 Km. This is an established source and has been studied in detail
3 - 33
and is providing materials for the currently under-construction projects like the Khan Khwar
and Allai Khwar Hydrpropower Projects. Currently, the KKH has been upgraded and shall
provide an easy access to this deposit. This sand source is also considered promising for
the Jabori Project.
3.11.6 Sources of Cohesive material
A search for the cohesive materials (silt and clay) has been made in the Project site and its
nearby areas as described below;
3.11.6.1 Available Sources in the Project Area
A clay / silt deposit is situated in Giar sacha village on the right bank of Siran river, about
one kilometer upstream of the weir axis in the reservoir area. This deposit consists of light
to dark brown and 3-5 m thick plastic clay / silt layer, overlying the bed rock. The deposit is
present in the form of cultivated terraces. These terraces are 100 m x 150m in extent and
have been investigated upto 5 m depth. Two test pits were excavated on these terraces and
bulk samples collected for laboratory testing. The laboratory test results are given in Table-
3.5.5
3.11.6.2 Borrow Area Sources
Although the above mentioned clay / silt deposit seems quite promising and is situated
close to the weir site, yet a potential borrow area for this type of material has been identified
and studied in the Buger Mang locality near Dadar on the Jabori Dadar road. The deposit
is situated 7 km downstream of the weir site.
The deposit consists of light to dark brown clay and silt, medium plastic in nature with
concretions at places. The deposit has an estimated extent of 30m x 50 m and is
investigated through a 5 m deep test pit. A sample was also collected from this deposit. The
laboratory results are given in Table-3.5.5
3.11.7 Other Materials (Marble and Quartzites) in Project Area
Besides the construction materials discussed above in this section, other materials available
in the Project area have also been checked for their suitability as construction materials.
Locally, a marble outcrop is present about 3 km upstream of Jabori town along the road
side. A crusher has been installed by the road contractor, which is producing aggregates of
various fractions. This material is being used in the road construction. It was observed that
Marbles being softer in nature shall not qualify for the Jabori Project requirements, therefore
was not further studied and tested.
The other material present at some places in the Project area is the quartzitic beds exposed
in the road cuts. A significant exposure was observed in front of local guest house. This
material, although quite hard in nature, yet was not considered suitable due to the presence
of abundant mica content and its deleterious nature.
3 - 34
3.11.8 Cement
The rocks and river bed alluvium in the Project area have been tested to check its potential
for Alkali Silica Reaction (ASR) if used with Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC). These
studies at the initial stage are based on the petrographic analysis of the rock types which
generate the river bed alluvium. In all 12 rock samples were analyzed petrographically.
These results mainly indicate that all major rock units in the area are dominantly micaceous
in nature and are considered reactive as regards the ASR potential due to presence of
strained quartz in significant percentage. Therefore these materials have been considered
unsuitable for use as concrete aggregate with the OPC. The results of the Petrographic
analysis are given in the Table 3.6.1 and the details are given in the Report on the
Petrographic Analysis in Annexure 3-E.
In view of above findings it will be advisable to use Low alkali Cement instead of OPC to
counter the ASR effect. However, if some suitable source of concrete aggregates is
procured from the borrow areas like Oghi (Mansehra), Abbottabad etc. as mentioned in
Section 3.11.4.2, then the use of Low alkali cement can be minimized. As an alternative to
low alkali cement the use of slag cement or some type of pozzollonic material mixed with
OPC can also be considered. Special studies shall have to be taken to decide about the
type of the cement to be used and the final decision shall be based on the economics of the
Project.
The required cement quantities can be procured from the cement factories situated in the
area between Hasanabdal and Islamabad, nearly 150 170 km from the Jabori site.
Numerous cement factories produce OPC and some of these also produce low alkali
cement on demand. The cement factories present in the belt from Hasanabdal to Islamabad
are listed below;
Bestway Cement - Islamabad
Askari ( Wah) Cement Wah ( Hasanabdal)
Fecto Cement - Islamabad
Fauji Cement Wah ( Hasanabdal)
Mustehkam Cement ( Hasanabdal)
3.11.9 Water
Water is present in abundance in the Project area and shall be available from Siran River
having perennial flows. Therefore no problem about the availability of water is foreseen. For
assessing the quality of water, samples from the river flow at weir site and in the area of
Powerhouse have been collected. A few samples were also collected from the boreholes. In
all 05 Nos of water samples have been tested in the laboratory to determine its suitability as
construction material. Table given below shows that collected water samples are suitable
for construction purposes.
3 - 35
No of
Sr Test Permissible
Test Samples Standard Remarks
No Value Limits
/ Tests
Total Within
70-135 ASTM
1 Dissolved 5 50,000 ppm acceptable
ppm C1602/C1602M-04
Salts TDS limits
Chloride 7-11 ASTM
2 5 500 ppm -do-
Cl ppm C1602/C1602M-04
Sulfate 7-10 ASTM
3 5 3,000 ppm -do-
SO 4 ppm C1602/C1602M-04
4 pH 5 8.0-8.36 >5 AS 1580.505.1 -do-
The laboratory results of the water samples are also given in Annexure 3E.
3.11.10 Steel
The local (Mansehra) market is procuring steel from Rawalpindi and Lahore. Therefore for
this Project as well, the steel will have to be procured from the Rawalpindi or Lahore
markets.
3.12 Recommendations for Future Investigations
The geological and geotechnical investigations mentioned in this chapter were aimed at
generating the data required for Feasibility level design of the Jabori hydropower project. At
detailed design stage additional investigations will be required, which are briefly described
below;
1. Detailed geological mapping along the significant structures and along the tunnel
route picking up the important lithological and structural features. This is particularly
important in view of the tectonic features like syncline passing through the weir site
and the power tunnel intake area. Similar field activities shall be required in the
power house area. Also topographic survey along the proposed tunnel corridor shall
be required in the next stage of study.
2. Drilling of boreholes in overburden as well as in rock at the important locations
specially on the right bank of weir axis for developing bedrock profile along the weir
axis, the surge tank area and a few deep holes along the tunnel in strata occupied
dominantly by marbles and quartzite at higher levels. For this purpose about 300 m
drilling is envisaged.
3. A few test pits shall also be required in the foundation area for the collection of bulk
and block samples for laboratory testing.
4. Laboratory testing on both the soil and rock core samples including both the routine
tests and the specialized testing. Some laboratory testing may also be required for
construction materials evaluation.
5. The petrographic analysis has indicated that the country rocks and the available
concrete coarse aggregate shall be reactive to the OPC, therefore the low alkali
cement or the use of slag or pozzolonic material shall be required for the concrete
production. This aspect shall need further studies and confirmation during the next
phase of studies.
3 - 36
TABLES
Table-3.1
Jabori Hydropower Project
Details of Exploratory Drilling
Borehole Drilled Coordinates (m) Drilling Completed (m) Date

S. No. Location
No. Depth (m)
Easting Northing Elevation Overburdon Rock Total Started Completed
1 JWV-02 Weir Axis-River Bed 30 17.5 12.5 30.0 10-03-09 25-03-09

3223801.57 1158858.64 1374.32
2 JWR-01 Weir Axis-Right Abutment 21.5 21.5 0.0 21.5 15-05-09 20-05-09
3223780.52 1158815.56 1383.65
3 JWR-04 Weir Axis-Right Abutment 20 3223637.15 1158893.49 1405.01 5.7 14.3 20.0 09-07-09 15-07-09
4 JWR-05 Weir Axis-Sand Trap 10 10.0 0.0 10.0 31-03-09 04-04-09

3223789.07 1158826.10 1376.59
5 JWL-03 Weir Axis-Left Abutment 25 6.7 18.3 25.0 18-06-09 08-07-09

3223826.88 1158886.00 1386.86
6 JP-01 Powe Tunnal-Intake Portal 31 5.3 25.7 31.0 15-04-09 11-05-09

3224081.22 1158718.13 1386.13
7 JP-03 Power Tunnal-Tailrace 17 10.5 6.5 17.0 09-04-09 18-04-09

3224944.16 1157463.49 1258.11
8 JP-04 Power House 25 9.7 15.3 25.0 09-05-09 21-05-09

3224922.31 1157484.35 1273.72
Total 179.5 86.9 92.6 179.5

Table-3.2
Exploratory Drilling-Insitu Testing
Borehole Drilled Depth Insitu Testing

S. No. Location Remarks
No. (m) PT* 2
WPT*3 SPT*4 CPT*5
1 JWV-02 Weir Axis-River Bed 30 6 2 - 14

Weir Axis-Right
2 JWR-01 21.5 5 - 7 07
Abutment
Weir Axis-Right
3 JWR-04 20 1 3 - -
Abutment
4 JWR-05 Weir Axis-Sand Trap 10 3 - 7 03
Weir Axis-Left
5 JWL-03 25 2 3 - -
Abutment
Powe Tunnal-Intake
6 JP-01 31 - 5 - -
Portal
7 JP-03 Power Tunnal-Tailrace 17 4 1 - 01
8 JP-04 Power House 25 2 3 - -
Total 179.5 23 17 14 25
PT*2 = Permeability Test

3
WPT* = Water Pressure Test
SPT*4 = Standard Penetration Test
CPT*5 = Cone Penetration Test
Table-3.3
Seismic Refrection Profiles
S.No. Profile No. Location Length (m) Remarks
1 JWPR-1 Weir Site-Right Bank 230 The locations of profiles are

2 JWPR-2 Weir Site-Right Bank 231 shown in Fig. 3.3 (sheet 1/2)
3 JWPR-3 Along Weir Axis 115

4 JWPR-4 Weir Site-Left Bank 230
5 JWPR-5 Weir Site-Left Bank 110
6 JWPR-6 Upstream Island Area 161
7 JWPR-7 Upstream Island Area 110
8 JWPR-8 Inlet Area at Upper Tarace 230
9 JWPR-9 Inlet Area at Upper Tarace 110
Subtotal-A 1527
10 JPP-1 Upstream Power House Area 230 The locations of profiles are
11 JPP-2 Upstream Power House Area 230 shown in Fig. 3.3 (sheet 2/2)
12 JPP-3 Power House-Downstream (Lower Tarace) 230

13 JPP-4 Power House-Downstream (Lower Tarace) 110
14 JPP-5 Power House-Downstream (Upper Tarace) 230
15 JPP-6 Power House-Downstream (Upper Tarace) 230
Subtotal-B 1260
Total (A + B) 2786
Remarks
Total Seismic refrection profiles carried out at weir site and power house sites = 15 Nos.
Total length of Seismic refrection profiles at weir site and power house areas = 2786m
Table-3.4
Testpit Excavation at site
Test Pit Drilled Depth Coordinates (m)

S. No. Location Status/Remarks
No. (m)
Easting Northing Elevation
Weir Site (Sandtrap
1 TP-1 3.0 3223804.7 1158818.85 1374.5 Completed
Area)
Weir Site (Convence
2 TP-2 2.8 3223895.51 1158771.09 1373.95 Completed
Channel)
3 TP-03 Portal Inlet Area 5.0 Completed
4 TP-4 (Conveyance Channel) 3.0 3223761.632 1,158,814,892 1388.845 Completed
5 TP-5 (Conveyance Channel) 3.0 3224002.73 1158722.89 1389.22 Completed
6 TP-6 (Conveyance Channel) 3.0 Completed
7 TP-7 (Conveyance Channel) 3.0 3224003.61 1158731.22 1379.70 Completed
TP-JPC- River Valley Island near

8 3.0 Completed
01 u/s Power House
Table-3.5.1
Petrographic Analysis
Sample
Sr. No. Type Location Rock Constituents Petrographic Name Remarks
No.
Biotitic Ore Micaceous
Muscovite Plagioclase Carbonates Staurolite Amorphus Quartzite Carbonate
Quartz (%) Biotite (%) Muscovite Garnet (%) Illite (%) Epidote (%) Minerals Quaz
(%) (%) (%) (%) Silica (%) Clasts (%) Clasts (%)
(%) (%) Clasts (%)
Surface
L/S Weir
1 SRS-01 Rock 5% 42% 2% 5% 3% Biotite Quartz Schist Deleterious to concrete
Axis
Sample
Surface
R/S Weir
2 SRS-02 Rock 2% 38% 5% 2% Biotite Quartzite Deleterious to concrete
Axis
Sample
Surface
3 SRS-03 Rock Inlet Portal 2% 30% 8% 3% 3% Garnet Biotite Quartzite Micaceous Deleterious to concrete
Sample
Surface Towards
4 SRS-04 Rock Power 3% 10% 40% 8% 4% 2% 5% Quartz Mica Biotite Schist Micaceous Deleterious to concrete
Sample House
Surface
3-Nala
5 SRS-05 Rock 15% 25% 6% 1% 3% Biotitic Quartz Schist Deleterious to concrete
Samples
Sample
Surface
6 SRS-06 Rock 10% 1% 9% Deletarious Quartz Deleterious to concrete
Sample
Surface
Staurolite Garnet Mica
7 SRS-08 Rock 5% 8% 44% 6% 2% Micaceous Deleterious to concrete
Schist
Sample
Surface
8 SRS-09 Rock 38% 12% 3% 5% 1% Garnet Mica Schist Deleterious to concrete
Sample
Surface
9 SRS-10 Rock 10% 30% 10% 10% 15% Biotite Quartz Schist Micaceous Deleterious to concrete
Sample
WRCS- Rock Core Staurolite Garnet Mica
10 12% 30% 5% 4% 2% 4% 5% Micaceous Deleterious to concrete
02 Sample Schist
11 20% 37% 3% 4% 0% 5% 5% Deleterious to concrete
03 Sample Schist
12 42% 7% 5% 5% 3% Micaceous Deleterious to concrete
04 Sample Schist
OPC w.r.t ARS potential
Table-3.5.2
Geotechnical Investigation Results of Rock and Rock Core Samples
Test
Uniaxial Compressive
Test Point
Lab Borehole/T Sample Unconfined Strength
S.No Prog Depth Specific Load Porosity
No. est Pit No. Compressive Triaxial
No. Gravity Index (Is % Young' Poission's
Strength UCS (UCS)
50) (Mpa) Modulus Ratio
7 2 28 JP-01 RCS-01 2.95 1.37
4 2 28 JWV-02 RCS-02 20.2-20.47 2.89 4.05 0.84 52 6.78E+03 0.349 No Result
5 2 28 JWL-03 RCS-04 19.3-19.43 2.99 2.61 3.33 55.87 56 9.49E+03 0.342
11 2 28 JWR-04 WRCS-01 80.06
1 2 28 JWR-04 WRCS-02 13.0-13.21 2.86 3.9 0.68 70 2.35E+04 0.654
2 2 28 JP-01 WRCS-03 18.62-18.63 3.23 74.78
3 2 28 JP-04 WRCS-04 24.3-24.47 2.89 4.3 1.32 45 3.96E+04 0.475
Table-3.5.3
Geotechnical Investigation Results of Soil Samples
Test Results
Standard Proctor
Test Permea- Triaxial test
Lab Test Pit Sample Compaction Dispersion
S.No Prog Depth Specific Absorption bility SO4 Undrained
No. No. No. (Pinhole
No. Gravity % Max. DD O.M.C K20 (%) (CU) Drained
Test) C' Phi' C' Phi'
(Mg/M3) (%) cm/sec
(kpa) (deg) (kpa) (deg)
14 3 28 TP-01 BLS-01 0.3-0.6 1.749 17.62
1 3 28 TP-02 BLS-02 0.3-0.6 1.857 12.75 0.0023
16 3 28 TP-02 BLS-02 0.3-0.6 9.73E-07
12 3 28 TP-03 BLS-03 4.7-5.0 1.617 15.72 9 30
11 3 28 TP-05 BLS-04 0.3-0.6 1.537 14.04 2.75E-02
2 3 28 TP-JPC-06 BLS-05 1.5-1.8 1.855 12.92 9.44E-07 ND 1 0.0024 25 24
3 4 28 TP-01 BS-03 2.5-3.0 2.79 0.97 10 31
4 4 28 TP-02 BS-04 1.0-2.0 2.78 0.99
5 4 28 TP-02 BS-05 2.0-2.8 2.75 0.47
6 4 28 TP-05 BS-01 0.0-3.0 2.8 0.99
7 4 28 TP-06 BS-01 0.0-3.0 2.74 0.41
8 4 28 TP-08 BS-01 0.0-3.0 2.75 0.36
9 4 28 TP-09 BS-01 0.0-3.0 2.7 0.97
Table-3.5.4
Chemical Analysis of Water Samples

Test
Borehole/ Sample Depth SO4 p.H value TDS CL
S.No Prog Lab No.
Test Pit No. m (ppm) (30C) (ppm) (ppm)
No.
1 7 28 JP-04 5 11.2 8 8.36 135 7
2 7 28 JWR 1 0.0 7 8.22 70 8.5
3 7 28 JWL-03 9 13.5 10 8.22 105 7.8
4 7 28 JP-03 3 3.5 7 8.0 70 7
5 7 28 TP-01 6 3.0 7 8.15 132 11
Table-3.5.5
Geotechnical Investigation Results for Construction Material
Gradation Minus 3 Inch

Soft & Friable Los Angeles Sulphate Soundness
Test Test Atterberg's Limits Classification
Lab Composite Bulk Depth Specific Water Sand (Coarse Petrographic
Sr.No Prog Pit Location Material
No. Soil Sample No. (m) Passing Gravity Abs % Equivalent aggregate %tag Uniformity Analysis
No. No. L.L P.L P.I Grevel % Sand % Silt % Clay % Fine Coarse
# 200 Particals) of Wear of wear
River bed
material from
1 6 28 TP-JPC-01 JPC-01 3.00 Sandy Gravels - - - - - - - - 2.75 0.43 89 0.08 44 0.32 No Result 0.54 0.46
U/s island (Weir
site)
River bed
material from
2 6 28 TP-JPC-02 JPC-02 3.00 Island d/s of Sandy Gravels - - - - - - - - 2.70 0.36 77 0.58 37 0.19 No Result - 0.3
Power house
area
Parahna (Jabba
3 6 28 TP-JPC-04 JPC-04 0.10-3.0 Farooq Khan) Light gray to gray color fine to coarse sand No Result 2.70 0.99 83 No Result - - 0.38 -
ERRA source
Shahzeb Lake
4 6 28 TP-JPC-05 JPC-05 0.10-3.0 Light gray fine grainled micaceous sand No Result 2.70 1.00 82 No Result - - 0.73 -
d/s of weir
Dark brown, stiff to very stiff highly plasticity. Clayey

5 6 28 TP-JPC-06 JPC-06/1 0.10-4.0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
silt, slightly moist
Ghar Sacha
Light brown, stiff to very stiff silty clay / clayey silt
Terraces at Rt
6 6 28 TP-JPC-06 JPC-06/2 4.0-5.0 with minor amount of anguler gravells of quartz mica 45 38 7 0 19 51 30 81 - - - - - - - -
bank u/s of weir
schist
(Borrow area)
Dark brown, stiff to very stiff clay / silt medium
7 6 28 TP-JPC-07 JPC-07 0.10-5.0 35 30 5 0 26 48 26 74 - - - - - - - -
slightly plasticity moist trace concretion at places
New Buger
Light brown, stiff to very stiff, clayey silt. Medium
8 6 28 TP-JPC-08 JPC-08 0.0-5.0 Mang (Dadar 27 22 5 0 44 36 20 56 - - - - - - - -
plasticity, low moist. Trace concretion at places.
area)
From river bed
Manda
9 6 28 JPC-09 material (sand) Sillica sand medium to coarse grained No Result No Result No Result No Result No Result - - - No Result
Gucha
Manda Gucha
Table-3.5.6
Grain Size Analysis

Test Atterberg's Limits Classification
Borehole No. /
S.No. Prog Lab No. Sample No. Passing
Test pit L.L P.L P.I Gravel % Sand % Silt % Clay %
No. #200
6 5 28 JWR-01 SPT-03 2 47 34 17 51
5 5 28 JWR-01 SPT-1+2 37 31 22 11 33
7 5 28 JWR-01 SPT-4+5+6 0 46 34 20 54
1 5 28 JWR-05 SPT-01 63 37
2 5 28 JWR-05 SPT-02 34 46 20
3 5 28 JWR-05 SPT-03 28 50 15 7 22
4 5 28 JWR-05 SPT-05 12 63 16 9 25
18 3 28 TP-01 BLS-01 30 25 5 42 37 21 58
8 4 28 TP-01 BS-03 14 69 17
19 3 28 TP-02 BLS-02 33 27 6 27 47 26 26
9 4 28 TP-02 BS-04 70 27 3
10 4 28 TP-02 BS-05 85 15
20 3 28 TP-03 BLS-03 81 12 7 19
11 4 28 TP-03 BS-01 54 31 15
12 4 28 TP-04 BS-01 66 16 18
21 3 28 TP-05 BLS-04 51 24 16 9 25
13 4 28 TP-05 BS-01 29 46 25
14 4 28 TP-06 BS-01 64 22 14
15 4 28 TP-07 BS-01 31 42 27
16 4 28 TP-08 BS-01 34 28 25 13 38
17 4 28 TP-09 BS-01 40 52 8
22 3 28 TP-JPC-06 BLS-05 33 26 7 34 42 24 66
FIGURES
72 45' 73 00' 73 15' 73 30'
Figure - 3.2 N
Thakot
Bar Gunagoo
er
34 45'
Riv
Miranai
us
Ind
Balgram
Rajdhawari
Bal Kabulgram
Gopoorai Chhopri
r
e
iv
R
r
Domel h
a
n
u
K
Derai JOBORI
Battal
Siran River
Didal
Balakot
Oghi Fort
34 30'
Palosol
Bandi Sadiq
Shinkiari
Dobro
Giddar pur
go
an
S
Balta ng
w
ha
Kis
a
n
Garhi
Indus River
Habibullah
R
iv
Khaki
e
r
Muzaffarabad
Phulra Mansehra
Darband
Jh
e
Amb lu
m
Riv
er
Chure Gali
Lassan
Goldonion
34 15'
r
e
iv
R
n
a
Sherwan
ir
S
Jhelum
Band Poswal Kakul
Mihal
Abbottabad
ke
River
La
ela
rb
Tarbela
Ta
Kako
Kundriala
Nathia Gali
Havelian
34 00'
Haripur
Tipra
Murree
Reproduced from GSP record Vol - 13 part - 1
LEGEND:- SARHAD HYDEL DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION (SHYDO)
GOVERNMENT OF NWFP
SEDIMENTRY ROCKS
FEASIBILITY STUDIES OF THREE HYDROPOWER PLANTS
(KOTO, JABORI AND KARORA)
Hazara Formation: Shale, siltstone, sandstone block, Rocks of moderate to high metamorphic grade (staurolite,
Alluvium grey and brown, in places phyllite and slate. kyonite and siliminite zones), schist, gneiss, marble,
quartzite, amphibolite. Includes unmaped granite areas. JABORI HYDROPOWER PROJECT
LOCAL AREA GEOLOGICAL MAP
Abbotabad Formation ( Infra-Triassic) Dolomite,chert Murree Series Shale, red, and sandstone, grey,
sandstone and Tannaki conglomerate member at base Mansehra Granite and Gneiss.
Includes Panjal volcanics and Agglomeratic slates ASSOCIATED CONSULTING ENGINEERS ACE (Pvt) Ltd
undifferentiated north of Kunhar River. METOMORPHIC AND IGNEOUS ROCKS 36-CIVIC CENTRE, M BLOCK MODEL TOWN EXTENSION
Faults LAHORE
DESIGNED CHECKED APPROVED BY
Contects are dashed where approximatly located.
RAZI F. K. SIDDIQUI
Limestone and dolomite. Triassic to Eocene. Limestone, Rocks of low to moderate metamorphic grades
------
and Abbotabad Formation (Permian and Corboniferous ? ) ( biotite and megmetic zone ), mainly quartzose shists River DRAWN DATE FIGURE
and quartzite includes tonal formation west of Abbotabad.
Undifferentiated, Includes infolds of Hazara Formation
JAN. 2010 3.2
South of Nathia Gali. Road TAHIR
PALTES
Weir Axis
Siran
River
PLATE-3.1: General view of the weir site area (looking upstream)
PLATE-3.2: Close up view of the weir site looking upstream.

Drilling operations in progress at hole JWV-2 in the valley.
Hole JWR-01
Drilling Platform
Upper Terrace
Lower Terrace
PLATE-3.3: View of the right abutment area of the weir occupied by the upper terrace
material. The hole JWR-01 drilled to depth of 21.5 m (El. 1362.1 m) in overburden without
encountering the bedrock.
Conveyance
Channel
Nalla Debris
Accumulate
Siran River
PLATE-3.4: General view of the nallah debris accumulate in the d/s of weir axis.
Surface Trace
of Power
Tunnel Route
Rock Slide Intake Portal

Area
Hole JP-01
Power Conduit
Siran River
PLATE-3.5: General view of the power tunnel intake portal area, showing the hole JP-01
location, power conduit and the surface trace of tunnel route.
Surface Trace of
power tunnel
Granthali foot Powerhouse

bridge area
Siran
river
PLATE-3.6: General view of the surface trace of power tunnel route and powerhouse
area of Alternative-B. This scheme situated u/s of the Granthali foot bridge. The
detailed view of powerhouse is shown in Plate # 7
Powerhouse
area
Siran river
PLATE-3.7: View of the Alternative-B powerhouse area, situated on the right bank of Siran River.
Note the abruptly rising rock faces from the River edge.
Surface Trace of
power tunnel
Powerhouse
Area
PLATE-3.8: General view of the surface trace of power tunnel route and powerhouse area of the selected Alternative-A.
This scheme situated d/s of the Granthali foot bridge. The detailed view of powerhouse is shown in Plate - 9
Granthali Foot
Track Bridge
Powerhouse
Area
Water Channel
Tailrace Area
Siran River
PLATE-3.9: Close up view of Alternative-A powerhouse area. This scheme situated d/s of the Granthali foot bridge.
Note the presence of low lying flat terraces along the right bank of Siran River to be used for tailrace channel.
CHAPTER
4
HYDROLOGY AND SEDIMENTATION

PART-4A
Pre-Flood Studies
CHAPTER 4
HYDROLOGY AND SEDIMENTATION

PART 4A
PRE-FLOODS STUDIES
4.1 General
The proposed Jabori HPP is a run-of-river scheme. It is located approximately 1 km

upstream of Village Jabori at Siran River. The proposed weir site is located at latitude 34-
36-02 North and longitude 73-14-59 East and power house is located at 2 km
downstream Jabori village near village Garnathli with latitude 34-35-13 North and
longitude 73-15-24 East. Jabori HPP catchment area is shown in Figure-4.1. Firm
locations of weir and power house were provided by the Client based upon SHYDO-GTZ
earlier studies. The catchment area of the proposed project is given as 225 km2 in TOR.
However, the catchment area estimated for proposed weir site by the Consultants using
1:50,000 Survey of Pakistan (SOP) Maps is estimated as 236 km2 and for proposed power
house location it is 273 km2. The catchment area is also estimated using 1:250,000 SOP
Maps to confirm the results. The catchment areas estimated by the Consultants for
proposed weir site and power house are used in the study. Hydro-meteorological
parameters for the proposed Jabori HPP are given in Table-4.1.
4.2 Data Availability

4.2.1 Available Reports and Studies
The previously-available reports were reviewed which included reports published by
SHYDO/ GTZ entitled Hydropower Development in Mountainous Areas of KP, Regional
Power Development Study Indus Swat/ Mansehra West, Vol. II Chapter 5, Second Edition,
in 1990 and later in 1995 with a sub-title of another report Regional Power Development
Study, Upgraded Potential Indus Swat/ Mansehra West, Vol. III Chapter 5, which also
includes information on Jabori HPP. In the first report, inventory of hydropower potential in
the region Mansehra West/ Indus Swat was established. The report provides small-sized
power plants, therefore, the hydrological potentials of rivers and nullahs were not described.
The report also gives some stream flow observations made during field visits in March/ April
1989 which includes snowmelt. In addition to that in June 1990 (dry flow season), some
observations were supposed to be carried out for stream flows in these areas, however, the
Consultants did not find any such data in the report. In 1995-96, the upgraded power
potential of these schemes was studied with different alternatives for each scheme. The
report provides only general design criteria for the defined schemes and alternatives and
suggests that these are only general guidelines for pursuing further design procedures. It is
also mentioned that a report on Climatology and Hydrology for the remote areas of KP is
under preparation by Prof. Dr. K. Hormann, Geography Institute, University of Kiel, Federal
Republic of Germany. However the report was not available with the Client.
The general topography of the region can be divided into two main parts. One part is called
Indus Swat which is about 110 km long and up to 50 km wide, and comprises a drainage
area of 3200 km2. The highest elevations in the north are between 4000 masl. to 4500 masl.
4-1
whereas the lowest elevation of the area is 470 masl. near Tarbela reservoir. The main
tributaries on the right bank are Khan Khwar, Gorband Khwar, Chakesar Khwar and
Barandu River system.
The second part is called the area of Mansehra West which is about 80 km long and up to
50 km wide and comprises a drainage area of 2670 km2. The highest elevation in the north
is about 4700 masl and the lowest elevation is 470 masl at Tarbela reservoir. The main
tributaries of Indus River at the left bank are Nandihar Khwar, Siran River and Unar River.
SOP maps are available on 1:50,000 and 1:250,000 scale.
The climatology of this area varies from northern high mountainous part to southern low
areas. At higher altitudes, the precipitation is snow, mostly received in winter that
contributes some runoff to the rivers. However, the winter runoff from November to March is
minimum in these rivers. Snowmelt starts in April and lasts till June. There is also some
monsoon but insignificant effects are registered in the northern areas of Indus Swat and
Mansehra West. In the southern areas of this region, there is major monsoon rainfall which
substantially contributes to the runoff of the Khwars during July, August and September. In
the catchment area of the proposed Jabori HPP the monsoon effects are moderate to
significant.
The flood studies by SHYDO/ GTZ were also carried out using some statistical models with
catchment area without considering other hydro-meteorological parameters such as slope,
shape of valley, vegetation cover, rainfall pattern etc. The details of procedures used were
not found in these reports.
No sediment data is available in this region except for some major rivers monitored by
SWHP. However, SHYDO is collecting suspended loads at some potential hydro power/
dam sites. The data on Jabori HPP from SHYDO is available starting year 2005 which has
been used to develop correlations for the estimation of long term data. Field observations
reveal that there is high flow of sediment.
As discussed earlier, preliminary studies of Jabori HPP have been briefly described by
SHYDO/ GTZ in the Master Plan of the Projects on Indus, Swat and in Mansehra West.
These studies and all other available reports and data were collected and carefully reviewed
for further investigations.
The present report will describe in detail the Hydrology and Sedimentation for proposed
Jabori HPP. The hydrological studies for a hydropower project are required to determine
probable runoff of the project catchment and thus discharges available for power generation
in its magnitude and seasonal variations. The aim of the hydrological analysis for the design
of hydropower project includes studies related to water availability for hydropower
generation. It also includes determining flood flows and evaluating downstream incremental
hazards in case of reservoir storage scheme. Estimation of river flows and peak floods at
proposed weir site, and analysis of sediment inflows in the river are discussed in detail in
this report.
4.2.2 Hydro-Meteorological Data
Available Hydro-meteorological data such as daily and hourly rainfall, daily stream flows,
temperatures, evaporation, sediment etc as collected from SWHP, WAPDA, was digitized.
The details of the hydro-meteorological data collected are given in Table-4.2. The data
4-2
collected has been computerized and the details of the analysis are given in the subsequent
sections.
4.2.3 River Flow Data
4.2.3.1. Sarhad Hydel Development Organization (SHYDO) Data
SHYDO is also collecting on daily basis stream flows for Siran river at Jabori and all of the
data till December 2008 has been received. The data was thoroughly reviewed and found to
be reliable and of good quality. This useful information helped the Consultants to develop
long term discharge data for the proposed Jabori HPP.
4.2.3.2. Surface Water Hydrology Project, WAPDA (SWHP, WAPDA) Data
There is no available record of long term river flows at the weir site and in the catchment
area of the proposed Jabori HPP. The nearest stream gauging station is Siran River at
Phulra on which long term data is available with SWHP, WAPDA since 1969. The available
data in the vicinity of the proposed Project till 2006 has been collected and digitized which is
given in Table-4.2. The details of mean monthly flows of Siran River at Phulra are given in
Table-4.3.
4.2.4 Rainfall Data
There are a number of rain gauge stations in the vicinity of the proposed Jabori HPP.
Rainfall data at Ziarat Levy Post, Kalam, Saidu sharif, Besham Qila, Shahpur, Puran,
Daggar, Jabbar, Oghi and Phulra are available with SWHP, WAPDA. For the analysis of
this study Jabbar, Oghi and Phulra are considered closer to the project area. However,
Jabbar is the closest followed by Oghi. Daily and hourly rainfall data for Jabbar and Oghi
was collected and analyzed for the study because there is no rain gauge station within the
catchment area of the proposed HPP. Daily and hourly data is available from 1974 to 2004
for Jabbar and from 1961 to 2006 for Oghi. Required data has been digitized and the mean
monthly precipitation data for Jabbar and Oghi rainfall stations are shown in Table-4.4 and
Table-4.5 respectively.
4.2.5 Isohyetal Maps
In addition to above rainfall data, annual normal isohyetal maps prepared by Pakistan
Meteorological Department (PMD) based on 30 years of data (1971-2000) on scale
1:5,000,000 are also available for Pakistan including the catchment and adjoining areas.
The location of the proposed Jabori HPP was marked on Isohyetal Map for Annual Normal
Rainfall which indicated the rainfall zone of the project area lying between 1000 and 1500
mm isohyte as is shown in Figure-4.2.
4.3 Temperatures
The climatological stations in the vicinity of the project area are Besham Qila, Oghi and
Phulra. Daily Maximum and Minimum temperature data for Oghi from 1976 upto 2006 has
been collected and digitized.
4-3
Mean maximum and minimum temperatures based on data so far collected are presented in
Table-4.6. The table shows that for Oghi, average of monthly mean maximum temperature
varies between 41C in the Month of June to 24C in the Month of January, whereas
monthly mean minimum temperature ranges between 12C in August to -5C in January.
4.4 Sediment Data
SHYDO is measuring suspended sediment data downstream of the proposed weir site
since 2005. The data upto December 2007 has been collected. This collected data has
been used for the development of long term sediment data for the project.
A stream gauging station of Indus River at Besham Qila since 1963 and Siran River at
Phulra since 1969 is being maintained by SWHP, WAPDA to measure suspended sediment
concentrations which is the closest station to the proposed Jabori HPP. The description of
the sediment study is given in subsequent sections.
4.5 Water Availability
4.5.1 General
This section describes the study of availability of water for the proposed Jabori HPP. Data
quality studies have been carried out before using this data for analysis. The details are
given in the following sections.
4.5.2 Verification / Consistency of Data
Data verification for consistency is carried out using Double-Mass Curve Technique
(DMC). This technique is based on the principle that when each recorded data comes from
the same parent population then it should be consistent. Both rainfall and stream flow data
are verified for consistency before the analysis of hydrological studies.
4.5.3 Verification of Rainfall Data by DMC Analysis
DMC have been plotted for Jabbar and Oghi using annual average precipitation of
neighborhood gauges which includes Kalam, Besham Qila, Puran, Daggar, Jabbar, Phulra
and Oghi rainfall stations as reference stations. Graphical presentation of the DMC is given
in Figures-4.3 & 4.4. The results of the analysis are summarized as under:
Results of Double Mass Curve Analysis for Rainfall Gauges
Precipitation Station Comments
Jabbar Minor in-homogeneties
Oghi Annual data is homogeneous
4.5.4 Verification of Stream Flow Data By DMC Analysis
DMC has also been used to check the consistency of stream flow data of Siran River at
Phulra from 1969 to 2006. As a reference time series, the data observed at gauging stations
4-4
of Kunhar River at Naran, Siran River at Phulra in the vicinity of the project area has been
used. A graphical presentation of the DMC is given in Figure-4.5. The results of the analysis
are summarized as under:
Results of Double Mass Curve Analyses for Stream Flow Data
Gauging Station Comments
Siran at Phulra Annual data is homogeneous
The results of DMC analysis show that there is no certain in-homogeneties for stream flow
data and the long time series observed for Siran River at Phulra shows that stream flows
are almost homogeneous. Based on the DMC results, the Consultants considered the data
reliable and used this for the analysis of water availability studies.
4.5.5 Rainfall and Stream Flow Data for the Project
As discussed above, Jabbar rainfall station is used in the hydro-meteorological analysis for
the proposed HPP. This is based on the Isohyetal map prepared by PMD as shown in
Figure-4.2.
There is no stream gauging station at the proposed weir site or within the catchment area.
SHYDO is measuring stream flows on daily basis and also measuring suspended load since
2005 for Siran River at Jabori of Indus Basin at a distance of 0.2 km downstream of the
proposed weir site at Latitude 34-36-16 and longitude 73-15-00 at an elevation of 1350
masl with a catchment area of 238 km2. The data is shown in Table-4.7 and presented in
Figure-4.6. At this gauge station of SHYDO, only 4 years of data is available since March
2005 to December 2008. To estimate long term flows at the proposed Jabori HPP, a
gauging station on Siran at Phulra is available since 1969 maintained by SWHP WAPDA.
The latitude and longitude of this gauge station are 34-20 and 73-05 respectively with an
elevation of 762 masl and catchment area of 1057 km2. The distance along Siran River at
Phulra from Jabori weir site is 34 km downstream.
Daily stream flows of Siran River at Phulra upto 2006 have been collected. At the time of
identification of the Scheme by SHYDO/ GTZ, the data was available only for Siran at
Phulra for the hydro-meteorological analysis upto 1995 and a specific discharge curve was
developed and annual design discharge was estimated by SHYDO/ GTZ based on data
available at the time of study. At this stage of the study, the Consultants have access not
only to updated data of Siran Rriver at Phulra but also the stream flows at Jabori HPP just
upstream of the proposed weir site as measured by SHYDO since 2005.
For analysis, a comparison has been made on monthly basis for stream flows of Siran River
at Phulra and Siran river at Jabori. The results are shown in Figure-4.7, which shows that
monthly variations are comparable however Siran at Jabori is providing higher runoff than at
Phulra except for the month of August. As stream flows at Jabori are available for 4 years
only therefore a correlation was developed between the discharges of Siran at Phulra and
Siran at Jabori to estimate long term runoff series for the proposed Jabori HPP. A
regression model was developed and used to estimate the mean monthly flows for
4-5
proposed weir site and powerhouse area which is shown in Figure-4.8. For 2007 and 2008
stream flow data of Siran at Jabori, was used as the gauge site is just 0.2 km downstream
of the proposed weir site with a difference of catchment area of only 2 km2. The estimated
mean monthly flows for proposed weir site and powerhouse are given in Table-4.8 and
Table-4.9 respectively. The graphical mean monthly variations for the proposed weir and
powerhouse site are shown in Figure-4.9 and Figure-4.10 respectively.
The results of Table-4.8 show a minimum discharge of 2.57 m3/s available in the month of
November 2002 and maximum discharge of 11.10 m3/s in the month of July 1977 for the
weir site. The net mean monthly flows (excluding ecological flows) vary between 4.03 m3/s
(10 MCM) in November to 7.54 m3/s (20 MCM) in April.
For powerhouse area, the results of Table-4.9 show a minimum discharge of 3.11 m3/s
observed in the month of November 2002 and maximum discharge of 13 m3/s in the month
of July 1977. Mean monthly flows vary between 4.8 m3/s (12 MCM) in November to 8.8 m3/s
(23 MCM) in April.
Mean annual flows for Jabori weir site and powerhouse location are graphically shown in
Figure-4.11 and Figure-4.12 respectively.
4.5.6 Dry, Average and Wet Years
An analysis of dry, average and wet years is also carried out in this study. Dry, average and
wet year flows are those having average river flow with a probability of exceedence of 85
percent, 50 percent and 15 percent respectively. Analysis is given in Table-4.10 which
reveals that 1985, 1969 and 1994 are dry, average and wet years with average river flows
of 4.94 m/s, 5.86 m/s and 6.44 m/s respectively. It also suggests that 6 years out of 40
years fall in dry year category and 7 years fall in wet year category.
4.5.7 Drought Frequency Analysis
Figure-4.13 shows percent deviation from normal river flows. Usually, years with deviation
up to + 10 percent are termed as normal years. Years with deviation below -10 to -25
percent are considered slight drought, below -25 to -50 percent as moderate drought and
below -50 percent are considered severe drought years.
Table-4.11 shows a deviations range from -29 to 27 percent for the flow data of the
proposed project. Out of 40 years of data only 8 years fall in the category of slight drought
years and one year falls within the moderate and no year falls in severe drought category
during the period 1969 to 2008.
4.5.8 Determination of Ecological Flows
For the determination of mean monthly ecological flow, a formula representing a function of
the available mean monthly discharges and the mean annual discharges, was used as
presented below,
Q e = {(0.0651 X Q m +2) /100} x Q a
4-6
Where
Q e = Mean monthly ecological flow (m3/s)
Q m = Mean monthly flow (m3/s)
Q a = Mean annual flow (m3/s)
The formula was also used for feasibility study for Madian HPP and feasibility study of the
Gabral-Kalam HPP and was developed by CEMAGREF which is an Agricultural and
Environmental Engineering Research Organization of (Antony) France. The model is also
recommended by the International Association of Small Hydropower.
This model is used to calculate the minimum ecological flows downstream of the weir of
Jabori HPP which then determines the net mean monthly flows as given in the Table-4.8.
4.5.9 Flow Duration Curve
Time exceedence data is required to represent time variability of water discharges. This
information is used for optimal sizing of a power plant. A flow duration curve (FDC)
represents relationship between magnitude and frequency of daily, 10-day or monthly
stream flows for a particular river basin at a particular location. This provides estimation of
cumulative percentage of time that a given quantity of flow was equal to or exceeded.
In the present study, a FDC has been prepared using Net Daily Mean Flows (NDMF) time
series calculated after subtracting the ecological flows. The NFDC thus developed is
presented in Figure-4.14 and the flows obtained from the curve are given as under:
Time
Exceeded 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Flow m/s 8.20 7.09 6.28 5.66 5.12 4.68 4.34 4.00 3.63
4.6 Flood Studies
4.6.1 General
In SHYDO / GTZ report a regional approach was adopted to estimate the floods for Jabori
HPP as these studies were carried out for only identification of schemes providing initial
findings.
In the present study Regional as well as Hydro-meteorological approach have been

adopted for the estimation of floods of proposed HPP.
4.6.2 Envelope Curve / Regional Approach
In this method floods for the river are plotted against a physical parameter like drainage
area. An envelope curve is then drawn; an appropriate discharge can be picked off for use
as a design parameter. This procedure is normally acceptable only for initial estimates and
is not considered as an accurate method for developing the real flood potential of a basin
4-7
for determination of Spillway Design Flood (SDF). This method is preferably used for
comparison only. One of the examples is the envelope curve developed for the rivers in
Gilgit-Baltistan areas by GTZ.
Based on the previous investigations in Gilgit-Baltistan areas, a regional method has been
derived by GTZ for the estimation of floods. Empirical relationships have been established
for determining the maximum flood. The parameters comprise catchment area and mean
elevation. To establish the empirical relationships, the maximum floods for various periods
of return were estimated from the available series of maximum floods at the gauging
stations in the Gilgit-Baltistan River basins.
The method for estimation of flood was developed as follows:
1. Flood frequency analysis was performed for all available stations in the area.
2. Specific discharge of estimated 5, 10, 100, 1,000 and 10,000-year floods were
calculated.
3. An enveloping curve was drawn to each set of specific discharges (5, 10, 100, 1,000
and 10,000-year floods), and a mathematical function was fitted to the curve.
The mathematical function is of the form:
Q max = C x An
Where,
Q max = maximum instantaneous discharge for the return period in m3/s.
C, n = coefficients.
A = catchment area in km2.
The mathematical function fitted to the enveloping curves is presented below:
Q 5 = 11.97 x A0.59
Q 10 = 15.60 x A0.57
Q 100 = 40.45 x A0.50
Q 1000 = 64.05 x A0.47
Q 10000 = 84.85 x A0.46
Where,
Q 5 , Q 10 , Q 100 , Q 1000 , Q 10000 = maximum instantaneous discharges for return periods

of 5, 10, 100, 1,000, and 10,000 years in m3/s.
A = Catchment area in km2.
4-8
Floods for areas affected by extreme monsoon rains cannot be calculated by such formulas,
and it is observed that floods caused by extreme monsoon rains are higher than the values
estimated with these formulas. However, the regional method may be used for the
estimation of maximum floods for comparison with other available methods. The estimated
10, 100 and 1,000 year floods of proposed Jabori HPP dam site are included in Table-4.14.
4.6.3 Hydro-Meteorological Approach
In this approach a unit hydrograph is developed to estimate the different return period floods
based on catchment, rainfall and various hydro-meteorological characteristics of the basin.
The details are provided in USBR, Design of Small Dams 2004 and briefly described in the
following sections.
To estimate floods using hydro-meteorological approach, the following parameters are

required to be analyzed before using this approach.
Analysis of Hourly Rainfall Data
24 Hours Maximum Rainfall
Analysis of Hourly Rainfall Data
The data from 1969 to 2006 at Jabbar reveals that daily maximum flows occured in 1992 in
the month of September. Hourly analysis of Jabbar is not carried out as the hourly rainfall
data of Jabbar for 1992 does not appear in the published data by SWHP, WAPDA.
Therefore hourly pattern of the same storm at the nearby station at Oghi was carried out for
the analysis. September 1992 storm of Siran river at Phulra was used in the flood studies to
give the optimized floods.
The storm of 1992 at Oghi was for a period of 33 hours and the distribution of the storm is
given below:
Hourly Rainfall Pattern at Oghi (1992 - Storm)
Time in Hours Rainfall in mm (Cumulative) Rainfall %age

6 95.5 39.2
12 149.4 61.3
18 190.2 78.0
24 219.6 90.1
30 240.1 98.5
33 243.7 100
The above table shows that 39% of the rain fell in the first 6 hours, 62% in the first 12 hours,
90 % in 24 hours and rest of 10% for the remaining of storm period.
24 Hour Maximum Rainfall
Daily rainfall data at Jabbar for the period of 1969 to 2006 has been used to determine the
maximum 24 hour rainfall values. Maximum 24-hour one day rainfall at Jabbar is shown in
Table-4.12.
4-9
Three different statistical approaches i.e. The Gumble Method, The Extreme Value Type-I
(EVI) and Log Pearson Type-III are adopted to estimate the flood rainfall for different return
periods. The results are shown in Table-4.13 and Figure-4.15. The results show similar
rainfall values by the three methods. The values of the rainfall for 2, 5, 10, 25, 50, 100, 500,
1000 and 10000 years are adopted as 82 mm, 117 mm, 139 mm, 168 mm, 189 mm, 210
mm, 235 mm, 280 mm and 335 mm respectively.
Estimation of Floods using HEC-HMS
Transformation of return period into required return period floods has been carried out using
a well known HEC-HMS (Hydrological Modeling System) developed by Hydrological
Engineering Centre, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The model was initially calibrated using
1992 flood of Siran River at Phulra. For the loss rate calculation, SCS Curve Number 70
was used for the 1,057 km2 catchment area of Siran River at Phulra. SCS Unit Hydrograph
calibrated parameters are:
Time of Concentration, T c = 6.82 hr
Time of Peak, T p = 4.59 hr
SCS Lag Time, T Lag = 245 min.
Using the above parameters, SCS dimensionless single-peaked unit hydrograph model and
1992 rainfall time distribution, the model was calibrated. The results are given as under:
Method Peak Flood (m3/s)

Observed 1,406.3
HEC-HMS Simulated (SCS) 1,410.4
The calibrated hydrograph is shown in Figure-4.16.
The calibrated model is used to estimate the Floods for proposed Jabori HPP. The results
are given in Table-4.14 and the 100 year return period flood is shown in Figure-4.17.
4.7 Sedimentation
4.7.1 General
Siran river is a tributary of Indus River. In the Gilgit-Baltistan areas of Pakistan, the rivers
usually carry larger sediment load requiring detailed analyses and sediment studies for the
design of Hydropower projects (see photograph below):
The details of the sedimentation studies carried out for the Project are described in the
following sections.
4.7.2 Sediment Record
SHYDO has started collecting data for suspended sediment since December 2005. No long
term sediment sampling measurements were carried out for Siran at the proposed weir site.
However, long-term data of recorded sediments are available on Indus River at Besham
4 - 10
Qila since 1963 and on Siran River at Phulra since 1968. The data alongwith SHYDO
suspended sediment has been digitized and used for the sediment study for the project.
Bedload deposition of Siran River near Jabori
An annual sediment data in the vicinity of the project area as collected was analysed. The
regional annual sediment data is given in Table-4.15.
4.7.3 Sediment Rating Curve
Suspended sediment concentration data is used to develop correlation between the rate of
flow and sediment load i.e. the sediment rating curve. The measured suspended sediment
data for the period 1969-2006 has been used for developing the sediment rating curves as
per USBR guideline procedures. The analysis is shown in Figure-4.18. The resultant
models to estimate the daily suspended load, using daily flows, are given below:
Qs = 60.32 x 10-3 Q w 2.925 For Q w < 28

Qs = 10.17 x 10-3 Q w 3.530 For 28 < Q w <95
Qs = 12.04 Q w 1.898 For Q w > 95
Where,
Qs = Sediment load, Tons/day
Qw = Water Discharge, m3/s
Suspended sediment rating curve given in Figure-4.18 has been used in conjunction with
the daily flow data of Siran river at Phulra for the period 1969 to 2006 to compute daily
suspended sediment load. Using these daily suspended sediment loads, monthly and
annual loads have been calculated. Mean monthly suspended sediments are given in
Table-4.16. These are the computed suspended loads for Siran river at Phulra gauge
station. Area reduction factor is applied to estimate suspended load for the Siran river at the
4 - 11
proposed Jabori dam site. The resultant suspended mean monthly loads for Jabori HPP are
given in Table-4.17.
In addition to above, suspended sediment data of Siran river at Jabori is also available for
year 2005 to 2008 (SHYDO). The rating curve is also developed for this data and mean
monthly estimated suspended sediments are given in Table-4.18.
Hydro meteorological parameters of Jabori HPP site are not comparable with Phulra for
sediment concentration. The rainfalls and the topography in the lower catchments produce
very high concentration of suspended sediment when compared with the upper catchments
of the Gilgit-Baltistan areas of Pakistan in which the main contribution of flows are snow
melt. A comparison of the hydro-meteorological parameters for a project in the northern
areas of Pakistan along with Jabori HPP, has been carried out by the Consultants and the
results are given in Table-4.19.
The annual suspended load estimated for Daral Khawar HPP is 207 Tons/km2. The results
of Jabori HPP estimated using SHYDO data are comparable with Daral Khawar HPP.
Therefore the suspended sediment estimated using SHYDO data are adopted for this study
which is given in Table-4.20.
4.7.4 Bed Load Measurements
Unfortunately, no bed load measurements are made on rivers in Pakistan on a regular basis
by any of the Government agencies.
For Daral Khawar HPP, the bed load sediment analysis has been carried out. Hydrographic
cross sections were developed and calculations of bed load were carried out using Smart
and Jaeggi model, normally used for gravel rivers with a slope of more than 2%. The slope
of Daral Khawar is 6.7% and at Jabori HPP is 9%. No bed load data is available for Jabori
HPP, therefore a correlation was developed using Table-4.21. The estimated mean monthly
bed load for project is given in the Table-4.22.
4.7.5 Total Sediment Load
Total sediment load at proposed dam site has been computed by adding the bed load to the
estimated suspended sediment load as given below.
Sediment Load
Sr. No. Description
(Million Tons)
1 Mean Annual Suspended Sediment Load 0.07
2 Unmeasured Annual Bed Load 0.14
3 Total Annual Load 0.21
Mean monthly variation of the total sediment load is shown in Figure-4.19.
The results show a large amount of sediment inflow which requires appropriate
arrangements and design for effective and timely flushing of these sediment flows for proper
operation of the power plant.
4 - 12
Consultants have also carried out suspended sampling for Jabori, Karora and Koto HPP for
the month of March 2009 which samples were analyzed at the International Sediment
Research Institute of Pakistan (ISRIP), WAPDA, 3 Canal Bank, Lahore. The results are
placed as Annexure-4 in Volume-III of the Report.
4 - 13
TABLES
Table-4.1
Hydro-meteorological Parameters
Jabori Hydropower Project (SHYDO)
River Name : Siran
Coordinates Elevations
Catchment Hydraulic Difference of Slope = Difference of
Location
Area (Km2) Length (m) Elevations (m) Elevation / Hydraulic Length
Lat Long Upper (m) Lower (m)
Upto Proposed Weir Site 236 34o-36-02 73o-14-59 32000 4287 1341 2946 S = 2946/32000 = 0.09 = 9%
Upto Proposed Powerhouse 273 34o-35-13 73o-15-24 36500 4287 1280 3007 S = 3007/36500 = 0.08 = 8%
Upto SWHP Gauging Station

1057 34o-20-00 73o-05-00 84000 4287 762 3525 S = 3525/84000 = 0.04 = 4%
Near Phulra
Aerial distance from weir to Phulra = 34 km.

Table-4.2
Hydro-meteorological Data for 3 HPP (SHYDO)
Type of Data Name of Station Parameters Data Collected

Karora-HPP
Rainfall Besham Qila Daily & Hourly 1964 - 2006
Temperatures Besham Qila Daily Max and Min 1971-2006
Gorband at Karora (SWHP) Daily Data 1975 - 2006

Stream Flows
Khan Khwar at Karora (SHYDO) Daily Data 2005-08
Sediment Data Gorband at Karora (SWHP) Measurements 1975-2006

Khan Khwar at Karora (SHYDO) Measurements 2005-07
Jabori-HPP
Jabbar Daily & Hourly 1974-04

Rainfall
Oghi Daily & Hourly 1961-2006
Temperatures Phulra Daily Max Min 1969 - to date
Siran at Phulra (SWHP) Daily Data 1969-2006

Stream Flows
Siran at Jabori (SHYDO) Daily Data 2005-08
Sediment Data Siran at Phulra (SWHP) Measurements 1969-2006

Siran at Jabori (SHYDO) Measurements 2005-07
Koto-HPP
Rainfall Kalam Daily & Hourly 1963-2006
Temperatures Kalam Daily Max Min 1963-2006
Swat at Kalam (SWHP) Daily Data 1961-2006

Stream Flows Swat at Chakdara (SWHP) Daily Data 1961-2006
Koto at Dir (Panjkora) (SHYDO) Daily Data 2005-08
Swat at Kalam (SWHP) Measurements 1963-2006

Sediment Data Swat at Chakdara (SWHP) Measurements 1961-2006
Koto at Dir (Panjkora) (SHYDO) Measurements 2005-07
Table - 4.3
Observed Mean Monthly Flows for Siran River at Phulra (1969-2006)
Mean Monthly Flows (m3/s) Annual Flow
S. No. Year
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec m3/s MCM MAF
1 1969 7.62 20.72 33.98 33.41 25.68 11.92 13.14 28.03 9.68 16.42 10.28 5.83 18.06 569.50 0.46
2 1970 7.30 10.31 27.04 21.43 10.45 4.78 13.90 27.86 43.60 14.10 5.04 4.59 15.87 500.38 0.41
3 1971 3.65 8.44 13.51 15.49 8.13 25.37 17.38 26.98 10.14 5.10 5.66 4.70 12.04 379.84 0.31
4 1972 7.67 12.34 31.71 35.39 31.71 13.70 13.36 21.80 12.74 7.93 5.97 7.36 16.81 531.52 0.43
5 1973 11.47 21.38 49.55 37.09 20.61 13.45 20.55 29.45 12.15 9.17 5.24 5.61 19.64 619.43 0.50
6 1974 5.92 9.63 17.53 17.70 10.31 7.53 18.60 17.02 7.81 5.38 2.75 5.01 10.43 328.95 0.27
7 1975 4.70 13.56 24.63 29.73 22.54 12.15 23.41 64.84 21.72 8.86 6.12 7.25 19.96 629.40 0.51
8 1976 8.95 22.31 34.26 52.94 33.13 20.67 52.10 76.16 18.94 14.69 8.61 7.50 29.19 922.98 0.75
9 1977 12.85 11.41 13.28 25.68 22.17 21.72 92.87 35.67 23.78 21.83 11.66 9.97 25.24 795.99 0.65
10 1978 11.78 14.64 31.43 33.69 26.02 14.95 45.87 68.80 18.54 11.55 13.00 9.14 24.95 786.84 0.64
11 1979 9.54 11.98 25.82 42.75 22.06 10.08 20.19 13.11 8.13 6.20 6.14 4.76 15.06 475.00 0.39
12 1980 9.06 22.00 35.96 39.35 21.83 19.65 19.90 21.18 11.75 7.39 5.58 5.80 18.29 578.30 0.47
13 1981 6.15 12.54 44.91 55.68 27.65 9.42 24.23 27.76 6.24 9.28 4.92 4.08 19.41 611.96 0.50
14 1982 4.14 9.48 31.20 35.05 34.79 16.99 20.47 42.64 5.53 9.27 9.28 8.68 18.96 597.95 0.49
15 1983 8.57 8.90 34.62 46.64 39.65 18.57 21.12 30.95 22.54 8.19 5.22 5.22 20.85 657.50 0.53
16 1984 5.28 6.62 18.00 28.01 13.42 7.25 14.71 34.05 21.94 7.49 6.25 6.86 14.16 447.67 0.36
17 1985 9.42 8.46 10.40 16.42 10.31 3.80 30.34 22.11 5.71 6.81 4.37 12.09 11.69 368.52 0.30
18 1986 7.93 13.75 42.15 42.67 29.75 19.61 22.39 36.08 11.12 8.67 18.31 18.41 22.57 711.77 0.58
19 1987 10.50 17.43 46.72 45.51 32.87 20.36 14.14 16.61 8.03 38.99 8.57 8.67 22.37 705.35 0.57
20 1988 8.48 12.18 37.41 28.86 14.91 5.29 76.82 50.62 14.83 7.84 5.20 7.34 22.48 710.93 0.58
21 1989 9.94 7.47 13.47 26.96 29.76 10.22 33.41 33.63 10.22 8.96 6.55 7.40 16.50 520.32 0.42
22 1990 9.98 25.80 44.02 43.09 31.47 12.08 21.14 38.10 16.94 9.38 6.70 28.02 23.90 753.57 0.61
23 1991 26.76 55.02 72.91 82.78 51.42 28.35 36.04 26.25 26.89 10.00 5.91 6.31 35.72 1,126.47 0.91
24 1992 21.35 25.62 49.72 50.46 37.79 20.96 40.16 28.29 87.80 19.26 13.36 10.17 33.75 1,067.10 0.87
25 1993 14.68 18.42 53.16 36.83 25.58 16.48 58.54 13.29 15.93 6.23 9.46 5.11 22.81 719.33 0.58
26 1994 7.45 14.75 29.07 53.05 29.26 15.05 52.54 45.83 12.52 11.73 7.57 13.02 24.32 766.97 0.62
27 1995 9.67 13.21 31.82 44.63 28.25 15.76 72.53 45.02 11.54 7.79 6.04 7.96 24.52 773.21 0.63
28 1996 8.30 18.27 62.25 42.84 28.50 21.16 19.47 33.01 9.53 10.91 4.64 6.94 22.15 700.55 0.57
29 1997 6.07 5.53 13.47 48.05 29.29 26.38 28.94 64.81 30.49 13.22 9.39 7.65 23.61 744.50 0.60
30 1998 9.45 46.78 52.27 64.00 37.18 12.34 20.60 12.56 11.81 6.14 4.53 3.92 23.47 740.00 0.60
31 1999 6.41 9.59 24.52 21.58 10.32 3.89 13.48 23.47 9.84 5.36 11.33 5.17 12.08 380.96 0.31
32 2000 7.55 9.36 11.52 13.57 6.90 6.83 19.93 23.06 8.82 6.91 3.33 3.88 10.14 320.59 0.26
33 2001 3.73 2.16 3.99 11.20 5.11 8.06 19.42 13.06 7.82 3.35 6.23 3.33 7.29 229.83 0.19
34 2002 5.36 7.21 14.49 14.95 7.48 6.12 6.34 27.50 8.66 2.75 2.11 2.97 8.83 278.40 0.23
35 2003 3.38 18.24 38.08 50.04 26.80 14.28 17.66 15.62 13.62 6.94 4.47 5.95 17.92 565.25 0.46
36 2004 8.39 12.64 12.80 9.24 8.96 7.49 11.46 11.73 9.41 9.28 5.80 5.59 9.40 297.22 0.24
37 2005 10.30 45.38 63.29 34.73 32.11 19.38 20.20 12.11 4.43 8.77 6.75 3.50 21.75 685.78 0.56
38 2006 12.20 14.92 14.65 23.26 18.68 9.01 33.22 54.29 15.75 5.94 6.54 15.22 18.64 587.82 0.48
Maximum 26.76 55.02 72.91 82.78 51.42 28.35 92.87 76.16 87.80 38.99 18.31 28.02 35.72 1,126.47 0.91
Minimum 3.38 2.16 3.99 9.24 5.11 3.80 6.34 11.73 4.43 2.75 2.11 2.97 7.29 229.83 0.19
Mean 9.00 16.28 31.83 35.65 23.76 13.98 28.96 31.93 15.97 9.95 7.08 7.66 19 610 0.50
Standard Dev. 4.50 11.25 16.76 15.87 10.91 6.58 19.62 16.81 14.33 6.27 3.24 4.72 6.50 205.30 0.17
Volume (MCM) 24 40 85 92 64 36 78 86 41 27 18 21
1 of 2
Table-4.4
Monthly Precipitation Data of Jabbar (mm)
CODE : 34736201 LATITUDE : 34 40 18

STATION : JABBAR LONGITUDE : 75 13 40
BASIN : INDUS ELEVATION : 2134 masl
AGENCY : SWHP INSTALLED : 1974
PROVINCE : NWFP
Period Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
1974 154 235 185 82 114 95 194 156 258 11 0 123 1608
1975 103 256 242 161 160 197 277 286 91 23 0 106 1900
1976 527 315 327 184 88 175 400 275 130 173 10 57 2659
1977 201 65 53 255 170 173 388 118 55 179 50 136 1842
1978 215 131 298 143 65 243 250 212 70 40 133 4 1802
1979 78 88 215 182 172 35 229 108 83 12 61 34 1297
1980 228 293 366 53 51 182 159 202 96 91 72 42 1835
1981 53 214 240 197 66 110 235 102 95 90 46 6 1452
1982 42 175 241 140 231 88 155 233 72 100 87 147 1712
1983 129 74 517 192 143 69 120 183 83 14 19 78 1621
1984 30 121 167 191 35 169 321 116 120 7 65 94 1437
1985 82 52 100 139 97 25 327 132 29 58 34 163 1238
1986 42 205 376 120 137 167 113 165 118 57 210 21 1731
1987 15 97 369 59 201 37 134 108 111 43 11 10 1196
1988 76 81 185 4 106 188 560 162 74 0.00 2 153 1591
1989 19 97 203 199 154 118 349 113 129 72 33 91 1578
1990 135 271 162 130 106 62 89 208 67 61 47 0 1339
1991 122 161 360 241 125 52 227 94 98 15 15 29 1537
1992 146 140 307 110 101 45 59 19 243 7 36 33 1246
1993 170 134 399 72 174 120 323 75 116 43 84 2 1712
1994 134 225 208 304 110 106 187 121 25 144 11 159 1733
1995 15 155 242 246 75 77 276 241 35 59 49 67 1537
1996 105 217 369 150 60 142 123 185 53 134 4 38 1579
1997 23 50 284 224 188 238 165 347 68 90 68 16 1760
2 of 2
1998 135 273 203 204 66 12 265 135 32 27 2 0 1353

1999 N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A
2000 N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A
2001 5 44 119 161 78 169 332 183 143 42 134 29 1440
2002 161 375 205 194 99 316 458 318 201 26 23 338 2713
2003 33 637 546 289 221 231 401 314 269 59 273 461 3731
2004 952 N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A
Average 142 185 267 165 121 130 254 175 106 60 56 87
NA = No record available
Table-4.5
Monthly Precipitation Data of Oghi (mm)
CODE : 34735002 LATITUDE : 34 30 2

STATION : OGHI LONGITUDE : 73 1 7
BASIN : INDUS ELEVATION : 1128 masl
AGENCY : SWHP INSTALLED : 1960
PROVINCE : NWFP
Period Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
1961 123 64 81 157 60 23 187 140 111 41 122 20 1129
1962 13 103 106 93 35 70 323 145 35 38 29 101 1091
1963 0 59 230 185 113 16 169 106 77 15 71 41 1082
1964 187 96 61 91 53 24 288 176 89 17 3 53 1137
1965 43 239 141 268 117 18 198 156 16 19 48 34 1296
1966 0 216 225 170 41 24 137 105 107 165 0 26 1216
1967 7 240 174 154 41 74 102 142 57 36 0 137 1163
1968 113 123 73 73 65 32 293 102 9 91 61 0 1037
1969 36 196 122 88 66 7 130 208 44 182 34 0 1113
1970 104 116 114 14 27 44 138 140 114 95 0 37 941
1971 23 164 18 82 13 419 113 168 39 2 0 38 1077
1972 172 86 188 136 69 44 137 215 65 45 57 112 1324
1973 117 167 141 51 50 84 176 133 42 23 0 42 1025
1974 81 139 70 32 41 94 150 159 121 2 0 90 978
1975 44 156 148 76 66 70 108 299 32 5 9 57 1072
1976 136 179 178 124 53 54 140 298 58 61 0 29 1311
1977 193 29 7 200 66 26 427 91 77 82 39 78 1317
1978 93 48 100 50 32 100 305 151 69 12 82 16 1058
1979 111 92 146 123 99 27 111 94 60 20 52 27 963
1980 128 160 230 27 14 123 120 93 87 79 36 26 1123
1981 87 152 217 140 42 41 142 64 48 38 20 0 991
1982 69 150 309 141 116 15 181 191 40 96 80 91 1479
1983 116 65 276 178 69 65 110 231 76 22 5 22 1236
1984 1 129 135 116 3 106 100 120 113 3 42 50 919
1985 113 30 37 70 49 48 187 96 44 60 23 206 963
1986 27 176 270 79 51 106 111 106 57 20 163 112 1277
1987 6 172 261 117 102 38 187 92 33 257 0 73 1338
1988 44 73 233 63 17 71 454 194 33 20 4 96 1303
1989 77 39 126 91 78 70 237 82 22 48 35 75 979
1990 94 203 262 79 9 10 173 199 120 66 17 328 1560
1991 130 228 236 231 67 52 187 91 118 5 14 27 1385
1992 275 133 278 101 69 41 207 85 272 55 37 42 1595
1993 94 105 274 49 34 74 259 68 105 21 73 0 1155
1994 92 184 164 180 77 61 161 280 11 107 1 110 1428
1995 24 87 195 192 57 50 330 43 20 12 64 38 1112
1996 91 183 310 94 63 84 99 96 25 74 3 28 1150
1997 47 26 171 179 104 151 77 344 57 52 48 20 1276
1998 28 190 172 183 37 30 133 112 53 20 0 0 957
1999 135 70 198 13 24 41 155 126 65 5 90 0 922
2000 137 72 66 21 12 88 222 146 105 37 0 53 959
2001 0 12 79 74 63 123 356 74 116 8 21 3 929
2002 48 97 93 28 30 154 88 168 60 22 0 55 844
2003 30 322 220 128 71 86 185 130 111 13 26 79 1401
2004 124 49 11 131 35 139 187 46 124 146 15 87 1093
2005 187 307 166 73 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 779
2006 205 134 57 85 49 49 180 273 16 37 72 174 1331
Average 87 132 160 109 54 69 184 143 69 49 32 59 1148
N.A = Data not available
Table- 4.6
Air Temperature at Oghi (C)
Lat: 340 30' 02" Lon: 730 01' 07"
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Period
Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max. Min.
1976 17 -3 18 -1 22 1 32 3 36 7 38 13 38 17 32 16 32 11 29 4 27 -2 21 -3
1977 16 -4 22 -3 29 -2 30 7 34 6 37 13 35 17 32 17 31 13 29 6 27 2 21 -3
1978 16 -3 23 -5 22 0 32 3 38 10 40 14 34 18 32 17 31 12 29 4 26 -2 23 -3
1979 N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A
1980 16 -3 17 -4 28 -1 32 4 37 9 38 13 35 18 32 14 32 11 29 4 26 1 21 -3
1981 19 -4 21 -3 27 0 31 3 35 12 37 13 34 16 33 12 32 12 28 6 26 3 20 -1
1982 19 -3 16 -2 22 1 28 8 30 8 36 9 36 16 32 13 32 10 29 4 24 3 16 1
1983 18 -2 18 -1 22 1 32 5 32 7 36 12 35 14 33 17 31 9 32 6 26 2 22 -1
1984 17 -3 18 -4 28 2 29 5 39 12 39 14 32 12 33 17 29 10 31 4 26 2 21 -1
1985 17 -1 23 0 27 4 32 5 37 9 38 14 38 16 32 17 33 11 29 4 25 2 22 -1
1986 18 -2 19 0 24 1 32 5 34 8 39 14 38 16 32 17 33 11 29 4 25 2 22 -1
1987 22 -1 21 -2 23 3 32 5 34 6 37 11 39 16 34 16 32 11 30 6 26 6 22 0
1988 19 -1 22 1 24 3 33 6 39 10 39 12 34 16 31 12 33 11 30 7 27 2 26 0
1989 17 -2 17 -2 23 2 29 6 36 9 37 13 37 14 31 14 32 10 31 6 25 2 23 -1
1990 20 -1 20 -1 25 1 33 3 37 7 38 14 36 16 32 12 31 11 29 6 27 2 22 0
1991 N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A N.A
1992 16 -2 19 -1 22 2 31 7 33 9 37 12 37 15 32 16 32 11 29 6 25 2 21 2
1993 17 -3 26 -2 24 1 31 3 37 9 39 13 36 14 32 15 31 12 29 5 24 5 21 2
1994 17 0 23 0 26 4 29 3 36 10 40 16 36 17 31 18 30 8 29 6 24 4 22 -1
1995 18 -1 18 -1 23 -2 27 3 37 10 39 16 37 17 31 18 31 11 28 7 27 -1 20 0
1996 18 6 17 -1 24 1 30 4 33 9 37 16 37 14 33 16 33 16 31 8 29 1 21 1
1997 21 -2 22 0 26 2 31 4 33 6 36 13 36 17 33 16 31 12 27 7 27 3 19 -1
1998 16 -1 18 1 26 2 32 8 39 9 39 14 35 18 34 16 32 14 32 7 29 3 26 1
1999 20 0 20 2 28 4 34 11 37 11 40 12 37 19 32 17 32 16 29 8 28 4 24 1
2000 21 -1 20 0 29 1 33 8 38 11 38 14 36 18 32 16 32 11 31 7 26 1 26 0
2001 21 -1 22 -1 28 3 32 7 40 14 37 16 34 16 33 17 32 13 31 8 27 3 25 1
2002 21 -1 21 1 30 3 34 7 39 11 41 16 38 17 33 17 31 11 31 8 26 6 22 1
2003 21 0 20 0 28 1 32 7 36 9 39 14 36 16 32 16 32 3 32 3 26 1 23 1
2004 24 -2 26 -3 29 5 32 9 38 6 37 14 36 16 32 16 34 14 31 6 25 6 22 2
2005 17 -3 18 0 26 7 32 6 32 10 N.A N.A N.A N.A 34 17 33 14 N.A N.A 19 4 20 2
2006 19 -1 23 0 25 2 36 5 39 9 37 13 36 16 34 17 31 11 31 9 26 3 19 1
Mean Max/Min 24 -4 26 -5 30 -2 36 3 40 6 41 9 39 11.7 34 12 34 3 32 3 29 -2 26 -3
Table - 4.7
Observed Mean Monthly Flows for Siran River at Jabori (2005-2008)
Mean Monthly Flows - m3/s Annual Flow

S. No. Year
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Cumecs MCM (MAF)
1 2005 - - 9.23 12.69 11.27 8.82 8.55 5.79 4.60 6.35 5.78 6.97 8.01 252.45 0.20
2 2006 4.92 7.43 6.99 8.47 6.78 4.82 8.01 7.92 4.29 3.94 4.58 4.36 6.04 190.56 0.15
3 2007 4.07 4.86 7.18 10.19 7.56 7.18 6.41 6.13 5.09 4.08 3.73 2.88 5.78 182.28 0.15
4 2008 3.75 4.30 4.95 7.12 5.32 6.76 7.02 6.10 4.00 3.63 4.35 5.56 5.24 165.65 0.13
Maximum 4.92 7.43 9.23 12.69 11.27 8.82 8.55 7.92 5.09 6.35 5.78 6.97 8.01 252.45 0.20
Minimum 3.75 4.30 4.95 7.12 5.32 4.82 6.41 5.79 4.00 3.63 3.73 2.88 5.24 165.65 0.13
Mean 4.25 5.53 7.09 9.62 7.73 6.90 7.50 6.49 4.50 4.50 4.61 4.94 6.27 197.73 0.16
Standard Dev. 0.60 1.82 1.24 2.12 2.40 2.01 1.11 1.14 0.40 1.35 1.03 2.07 1.21 37.92 0.03
Volume (MCM) 11 13 19 25 21 18 20 17 12 12 12 13
Table - 4.8
Calculated Mean Monthly Flows for Siran River at Jabori Weir Site (1969-2008)
S. Mean Monthly Flows (m3/s)

Year
No. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Gross Flows 4.39 6.40 7.71 7.66 6.94 5.19 5.39 7.17 4.80 5.86 4.91 3.97
1 1969 Ecological Flows 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.14
Net Flows 4.24 6.25 7.55 7.50 6.78 5.05 5.23 7.01 4.66 5.72 4.77 3.83
Gross Flows 4.32 4.92 7.07 6.48 4.94 3.68 5.50 7.15 8.47 5.53 3.76 3.62
Net Flows 4.18 4.77 6.92 6.32 4.79 3.54 5.35 7.00 8.32 5.39 3.61 3.48
Gross Flows 3.33 4.56 5.44 5.73 4.50 6.90 5.99 7.07 4.89 3.77 3.92 3.66
Net Flows 3.18 4.41 5.29 5.57 4.34 6.76 5.83 6.91 4.74 3.63 3.78 3.52
Gross Flows 4.40 5.26 7.51 7.83 7.51 5.47 5.42 6.52 5.33 4.45 4.00 4.33
Net Flows 4.26 5.12 7.35 7.67 7.36 5.33 5.27 6.37 5.18 4.31 3.86 4.19
Gross Flows 5.12 6.47 8.88 7.97 6.38 5.44 6.38 7.30 5.23 4.71 3.81 3.91
Net Flows 4.98 6.33 8.73 7.81 6.23 5.29 6.22 7.15 5.08 4.56 3.67 3.77
Gross Flows 3.99 4.79 6.01 6.03 4.92 4.37 6.14 5.94 4.43 3.85 2.99 3.75
Net Flows 3.85 4.65 5.85 5.87 4.77 4.22 5.99 5.78 4.28 3.70 2.85 3.61
Gross Flows 3.66 5.45 6.83 7.33 6.60 5.23 6.70 9.83 6.51 4.65 4.04 4.31
Net Flows 3.52 5.31 6.67 7.17 6.45 5.08 6.54 9.68 6.36 4.50 3.90 4.16
Gross Flows 4.66 6.58 7.73 9.11 7.63 6.39 9.05 10.45 6.18 5.62 4.59 4.36
Net Flows 4.52 6.43 7.57 8.95 7.48 6.24 8.90 10.29 6.04 5.48 4.45 4.22
Gross Flows 5.34 5.11 5.41 6.94 6.56 6.51 11.26 7.85 6.74 6.52 5.15 4.86
Net Flows 5.20 4.96 5.25 6.78 6.41 6.36 11.10 7.69 6.59 6.38 5.01 4.71
Gross Flows 5.17 5.61 7.48 7.68 6.97 5.66 8.63 10.05 6.14 5.13 5.37 4.70
Net Flows 5.03 5.46 7.33 7.52 6.82 5.51 8.48 9.90 5.99 4.99 5.22 4.56
Gross Flows 4.78 5.20 6.95 8.40 6.55 4.88 6.33 5.38 4.50 4.06 4.05 3.67
Net Flows 4.63 5.06 6.79 8.25 6.40 4.73 6.18 5.23 4.35 3.92 3.91 3.53
Gross Flows 4.68 6.54 7.87 8.15 6.52 6.27 6.30 6.45 5.17 4.34 3.90 3.96
Net Flows 4.54 6.40 7.72 7.99 6.37 6.12 6.15 6.29 5.02 4.19 3.76 3.82
Gross Flows 4.05 5.29 8.56 9.28 7.13 4.75 6.79 7.14 4.07 4.73 3.72 3.47
Net Flows 3.90 5.15 8.40 9.12 6.98 4.61 6.63 6.99 3.92 4.58 3.58 3.33
Gross Flows 3.49 4.77 7.46 7.80 7.78 5.94 6.37 8.39 3.89 4.72 4.73 4.61
Net Flows 3.34 4.62 7.31 7.64 7.62 5.79 6.21 8.24 3.74 4.58 4.59 4.47
Gross Flows 4.59 4.65 7.76 8.68 8.17 6.14 6.44 7.44 6.60 4.51 3.80 3.81
Net Flows 4.44 4.51 7.61 8.53 8.02 5.99 6.29 7.29 6.46 4.37 3.66 3.66
16 1984 Gross Flows 3.82 4.16 6.07 7.17 5.43 4.31 5.62 7.71 6.54 4.36 4.07 4.22
Ecological Flows 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.14
Net Flows 3.68 4.01 5.91 7.01 5.28 4.16 5.47 7.56 6.39 4.22 3.93 4.08
Gross Flows 4.75 4.56 4.93 5.86 4.92 3.38 7.38 6.56 3.94 4.21 3.56 5.22
Net Flows 4.61 4.42 4.78 5.70 4.77 3.23 7.23 6.40 3.79 4.06 3.42 5.08
Gross Flows 4.46 5.48 8.36 8.40 7.33 6.27 6.59 7.88 5.06 4.61 6.11 6.12
Net Flows 4.31 5.33 8.20 8.24 7.18 6.12 6.43 7.73 4.91 4.46 5.96 5.98
Gross Flows 4.95 5.99 8.69 8.60 7.61 6.35 5.54 5.89 4.48 8.12 4.59 4.61
Net Flows 4.81 5.85 8.53 8.45 7.46 6.21 5.38 5.73 4.33 7.97 4.45 4.46
Gross Flows 4.57 5.24 7.99 7.25 5.65 3.83 10.48 8.96 5.64 4.44 3.80 4.33
Net Flows 4.43 5.09 7.84 7.09 5.50 3.68 10.33 8.80 5.49 4.29 3.66 4.19
Gross Flows 4.85 4.36 5.44 7.06 7.33 4.90 7.66 7.68 4.90 4.66 4.15 4.34
Net Flows 4.71 4.21 5.28 6.91 7.18 4.75 7.50 7.52 4.75 4.52 4.00 4.20
Gross Flows 4.86 6.95 8.50 8.43 7.49 5.22 6.45 8.05 5.93 4.75 4.18 7.17
Net Flows 4.72 6.80 8.34 8.27 7.34 5.07 6.29 7.89 5.78 4.60 4.04 7.03
Gross Flows 7.04 9.24 10.28 10.78 9.01 7.20 7.88 6.99 7.06 4.86 3.99 4.09
Net Flows 6.90 9.09 10.12 10.62 8.86 7.05 7.73 6.84 6.91 4.72 3.85 3.95
24 1992 Gross Flows 6.47 6.93 8.90 8.94 8.02 6.42 8.21 7.19 11.02 6.22 5.42 4.89
Ecological Flows 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.15 0.14 0.14 0.14
Net Flows 6.33 6.78 8.74 8.79 7.87 6.28 8.05 7.04 10.87 6.08 5.28 4.75
Gross Flows 5.62 6.12 9.12 7.94 6.93 5.87 9.46 5.41 5.79 4.07 4.76 3.78
Net Flows 5.48 5.97 8.97 7.79 6.77 5.72 9.31 5.26 5.65 3.92 4.62 3.63
Gross Flows 4.35 5.63 7.27 9.12 7.28 5.67 9.08 8.63 5.29 5.16 4.38 5.37
Net Flows 4.21 5.48 7.11 8.96 7.13 5.52 8.93 8.47 5.14 5.02 4.24 5.23
Gross Flows 4.80 5.40 7.52 8.54 7.19 5.77 10.25 8.57 5.13 4.42 4.02 4.46
Net Flows 4.66 5.25 7.36 8.38 7.04 5.62 10.10 8.41 4.98 4.28 3.88 4.32
Gross Flows 4.53 6.10 9.68 8.41 7.21 6.45 6.25 7.62 4.78 5.02 3.64 4.24
Net Flows 4.39 5.95 9.53 8.25 7.06 6.30 6.09 7.47 4.63 4.88 3.50 4.10
Gross Flows 4.03 3.89 5.44 8.78 7.29 7.01 7.25 9.83 7.40 5.40 4.75 4.39
Net Flows 3.89 3.74 5.28 8.62 7.14 6.86 7.10 9.67 7.25 5.26 4.61 4.25
Gross Flows 4.76 8.69 9.06 9.78 7.97 5.26 6.38 5.30 5.18 4.05 3.61 3.42
Net Flows 4.62 8.55 8.91 9.62 7.82 5.12 6.23 5.14 5.03 3.90 3.47 3.27
Gross Flows 4.11 4.79 6.82 6.50 4.92 3.41 5.44 6.70 4.83 3.84 5.10 3.79
Net Flows 3.97 4.64 6.66 6.34 4.77 3.26 5.29 6.55 4.69 3.70 4.95 3.65
Gross Flows 4.37 4.74 5.13 5.45 4.23 4.21 6.30 6.66 4.64 4.23 3.21 3.40
Net Flows 4.23 4.59 4.97 5.30 4.07 4.07 6.15 6.50 4.49 4.09 3.07 3.26
Gross Flows 3.35 2.73 3.44 5.07 3.77 4.48 6.24 5.38 4.43 3.22 4.07 3.21
Net Flows 3.21 2.58 3.28 4.91 3.62 4.34 6.09 5.22 4.28 3.08 3.93 3.07
Gross Flows 3.84 4.30 5.59 5.66 4.36 4.04 4.10 7.12 4.60 2.99 2.71 3.08
Net Flows 3.70 4.15 5.43 5.50 4.21 3.89 3.94 6.96 4.46 2.85 2.57 2.93
Gross Flows 3.23 6.10 8.04 8.92 7.05 5.56 6.02 5.75 5.46 4.24 3.59 4.00
Net Flows 3.09 5.95 7.89 8.76 6.90 5.41 5.87 5.60 5.31 4.09 3.45 3.86
Gross Flows 4.55 5.31 5.34 4.72 4.66 4.36 5.12 5.16 4.75 4.73 3.96 3.91
Net Flows 4.41 5.16 5.18 4.56 4.51 4.21 4.96 5.01 4.60 4.58 3.82 3.76
Gross Flows 4.92 8.59 9.74 7.77 7.54 6.24 6.34 5.23 3.58 4.63 4.19 3.27
Net Flows 4.77 8.45 9.59 7.61 7.39 6.09 6.18 5.07 3.43 4.48 4.05 3.13
Gross Flows 5.24 5.65 5.61 6.68 6.15 4.67 7.64 9.19 5.77 4.00 4.14 5.70
Net Flows 5.10 5.51 5.46 6.52 6.00 4.53 7.49 9.04 5.62 3.85 4.00 5.55
Gross Flows 4.03 4.82 7.12 10.10 7.49 7.12 6.36 6.08 5.05 4.04 3.70 3.08
Net Flows 3.89 4.67 6.96 9.94 7.34 6.98 6.21 5.92 4.90 3.90 3.55 2.72
Gross Flows 3.23 2.73 3.44 4.72 3.77 3.38 4.10 5.16 3.58 2.99 2.71 3.08
Net Flows 3.09 2.58 3.28 4.56 3.62 3.23 3.94 5.01 3.43 2.85 2.57 2.72
Table - 4.9
Calculated Mean Monthly Flows for Siran River at Power House Location (1969-2008)
S. No. Year
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec m3/s MCM MAF
1 1969 5.05 7.38 8.89 8.83 8.00 5.99 6.21 8.27 5.53 6.76 5.66 4.57 6.76 213.21 0.17
2 1970 4.97 5.66 8.16 7.47 5.69 4.24 6.34 8.25 9.77 6.38 4.32 4.17 6.29 198.22 0.16
3 1971 3.83 5.25 6.27 6.61 5.18 7.96 6.90 8.15 5.63 4.34 4.52 4.21 5.74 180.92 0.15
4 1972 5.07 6.07 8.66 9.03 8.66 6.31 6.25 7.52 6.14 5.13 4.61 4.99 6.54 206.67 0.17
5 1973 5.90 7.46 10.25 9.19 7.36 6.26 7.35 8.42 6.03 5.42 4.39 4.50 6.88 216.92 0.18
6 1974 4.59 5.52 6.92 6.95 5.66 5.03 7.08 6.85 5.10 4.43 3.43 4.31 5.49 173.15 0.14
7 1975 4.21 6.28 7.87 8.45 7.61 6.03 7.72 11.35 7.51 5.35 4.65 4.96 6.83 215.51 0.17
8 1976 5.37 7.59 8.92 10.51 8.81 7.37 10.45 12.06 7.13 6.48 5.29 5.02 7.92 250.33 0.20
9 1977 6.16 5.89 6.23 8.00 7.57 7.51 13.00 9.06 7.77 7.52 5.94 5.59 7.52 237.13 0.19
10 1978 5.96 6.47 8.63 8.86 8.04 6.52 9.96 11.60 7.07 5.92 6.19 5.42 7.55 238.18 0.19
11 1979 5.50 6.00 8.01 9.70 7.55 5.62 7.30 6.20 5.18 4.67 4.66 4.23 6.22 196.12 0.16
12 1980 5.40 7.55 9.08 9.40 7.52 7.23 7.26 7.44 5.95 5.00 4.49 4.56 6.74 213.12 0.17
13 1981 4.66 6.10 9.88 10.71 8.23 5.48 7.83 8.24 4.68 5.44 4.28 3.99 6.63 208.98 0.17
14 1982 4.01 5.49 8.61 9.00 8.97 6.84 7.34 9.69 4.48 5.44 5.45 5.31 6.72 211.88 0.17
15 1983 5.28 5.36 8.95 10.02 9.43 7.08 7.43 8.58 7.61 5.19 4.38 4.38 6.98 219.96 0.18
16 1984 4.40 4.79 6.99 8.26 6.26 4.96 6.48 8.90 7.54 5.02 4.69 4.86 6.10 192.77 0.16
17 1985 5.48 5.26 5.68 6.75 5.67 3.88 8.52 7.56 4.53 4.84 4.10 6.02 5.69 179.44 0.15
18 1986 5.13 6.32 9.64 9.69 8.46 7.22 7.59 9.10 5.83 5.31 7.04 7.06 7.37 232.28 0.19
19 1987 5.71 6.91 10.03 9.93 8.78 7.33 6.38 6.78 5.16 9.37 5.28 5.31 7.25 228.53 0.19
20 1988 5.26 6.04 9.22 8.36 6.51 4.40 12.10 10.34 6.50 5.11 4.37 4.98 6.93 219.22 0.18
21 1989 5.59 5.02 6.27 8.15 8.46 5.65 8.83 8.86 5.65 5.37 4.77 5.00 6.47 203.95 0.17
22 1990 5.60 8.01 9.80 9.73 8.64 6.02 7.43 9.28 6.84 5.47 4.81 8.27 7.49 236.25 0.19
23 1991 8.13 10.67 11.86 12.44 10.40 8.30 9.09 8.07 8.14 5.60 4.59 4.71 8.50 268.04 0.22
24 1992 7.46 7.99 10.27 10.32 9.26 7.41 9.47 8.30 12.72 7.18 6.25 5.64 8.52 269.48 0.22
25 1993 6.48 7.06 10.53 9.17 7.99 6.77 10.92 6.24 6.68 4.68 5.49 4.35 7.19 226.87 0.18
26 1994 5.01 6.49 8.38 10.52 8.40 6.54 10.48 9.95 6.10 5.95 5.04 6.19 7.42 234.04 0.19
27 1995 5.53 6.22 8.67 9.85 8.29 6.65 11.84 9.89 5.91 5.10 4.63 5.14 7.31 230.55 0.19
28 1996 5.22 7.03 11.17 9.70 8.32 7.44 7.20 8.79 5.50 5.79 4.19 4.88 7.10 224.64 0.18
29 1997 4.64 4.48 6.27 10.13 8.41 8.08 8.37 11.35 8.54 6.22 5.47 5.06 7.25 228.66 0.19
30 1998 5.48 10.03 10.46 11.29 9.20 6.06 7.36 6.10 5.96 4.66 4.15 3.93 7.06 222.59 0.18
31 1999 4.73 5.51 7.86 7.49 5.67 3.92 6.27 7.73 5.57 4.42 5.87 4.36 5.78 182.41 0.15
32 2000 5.04 5.46 5.91 6.28 4.86 4.85 7.27 7.68 5.34 4.87 3.69 3.91 5.43 171.74 0.14
33 2001 3.86 3.14 3.95 5.84 4.34 5.16 7.20 6.19 5.10 3.70 4.68 3.70 4.74 149.45 0.12
34 2002 4.42 4.95 6.44 6.52 5.02 4.65 4.71 8.21 5.30 3.44 3.11 3.54 5.03 158.49 0.13
35 2003 3.72 7.03 9.28 10.29 8.13 6.41 6.94 6.63 6.29 4.88 4.13 4.60 6.53 205.86 0.17
36 2004 5.24 6.12 6.15 5.43 5.37 5.02 5.90 5.95 5.47 5.45 4.56 4.50 5.43 171.69 0.14
37 2005 5.66 9.92 11.24 8.96 8.70 7.19 7.31 6.02 4.12 5.33 4.83 3.76 6.92 218.26 0.18
38 2006 6.04 6.52 6.47 7.70 7.09 5.38 8.82 10.61 6.65 4.60 4.77 6.57 6.77 213.44 0.17
39 2007 4.64 5.55 8.21 11.66 8.64 8.22 7.33 7.00 5.82 4.65 4.25 3.28 6.61 208.32 0.17
40 2008 4.27 4.91 5.65 8.14 6.08 7.73 8.02 6.97 4.56 4.14 4.96 6.35 5.98 189.19 0.15
Maximum 8.13 10.67 11.86 12.44 10.40 8.30 13.00 12.06 12.72 9.37 7.04 8.27 8.52 269.48 0.22
Minimum 3.72 3.14 3.95 5.43 4.34 3.88 4.71 5.95 4.12 3.44 3.11 3.28 4.74 149.45 0.12
Mean 5.22 6.39 8.29 8.88 7.53 6.27 8.01 8.35 6.29 5.37 4.80 4.90 6.7 211 0.17
Standard Dev. 0.90 1.50 1.83 1.62 1.49 1.23 1.81 1.64 1.59 1.07 0.78 1.00 0.85 26.89 0.02
Volume (MCM) 14 16 22 23 20 16 21 22 16 14 12 13
Table - 4.10
Dry, Average and Wet Years Analysis
Annual Flow
Sr. No. Year Percentage Probability
Cumecs
1 1992 7.39 2.44
2 1991 7.37 4.88
3 1976 6.86 7.32
4 1978 6.55 9.76
5 1977 6.52 12.20
6 1990 6.50 14.63
7 1994 6.44 17.07
8 1986 6.39 19.51
9 1995 6.34 21.95
10 1997 6.29 24.39
11 1987 6.28 26.83
12 1993 6.24 29.27
13 1996 6.16 31.71
14 1998 6.12 34.15
15 1983 6.05 36.59
16 1988 6.01 39.02
17 2005 6.00 41.46
18 1973 5.97 43.90
19 1975 5.93 46.34
20 2006 5.87 48.78
21 1969 5.86 51.22
22 1980 5.85 53.66
23 1982 5.83 56.10
24 1981 5.75 58.54
25 2007 5.73 60.98
26 1972 5.67 63.41
27 2003 5.66 65.85
28 1989 5.61 68.29
29 1970 5.45 70.73
30 1979 5.40 73.17
31 1984 5.29 75.61
32 2008 5.19 78.05
33 1999 5.02 80.49
34 1971 4.98 82.93
35 1985 4.94 85.37
36 1974 4.77 87.80
37 2000 4.72 90.24
38 2004 4.71 92.68
39 2002 4.36 95.12
40 2001 4.12 97.56
Mean 5.8
Table - 4.11
Percent Deviation from Mean Annual Flows
Annual Flow
Sr. No. Year Deviation
Cumecs
1 2001 4.12 -29
2 2002 4.36 -25
3 2004 4.71 -19
4 2000 4.72 -19
5 1974 4.77 -18
6 1985 4.94 -15
7 1971 4.98 -14
8 1999 5.02 -14
9 2008 5.19 -11
10 1984 5.29 -9
11 1979 5.40 -7
12 1970 5.45 -6
13 1989 5.61 -3
14 2003 5.66 -2
15 1972 5.67 -2
16 2007 5.73 -1
17 1981 5.75 -1
18 1982 5.83 0.4
19 1980 5.85 1
20 1969 5.86 1
21 2006 5.87 1
22 1975 5.93 2
23 1973 5.97 3
24 2005 6.00 3
25 1988 6.01 4
26 1983 6.05 4
27 1998 6.12 5
28 1996 6.16 6
29 1993 6.24 7
30 1987 6.28 8
31 1997 6.29 8
32 1995 6.34 9
33 1986 6.39 10
34 1994 6.44 11
35 1990 6.50 12
36 1977 6.52 12
37 1978 6.55 13
38 1976 6.86 18
39 1991 7.37 27
40 1992 7.39 27
Mean 5.8
Normal Years
Slight Drought Years
Moderate Drought Years
Table-4.12
Maximum Annual Oneday Rainfall at Jabbar
Max. Annual One Day Rainfall

Sr. No. Year
(mm)
1 1969 44.96
2 1973 21.60
3 1974 74.70
4 1975 72.14
5 1976 193.80
6 1977 114.30
7 1978 68.80
8 1979 68.80
9 1980 69.90
10 1981 52.32
11 1982 56.00
12 1983 104.00
13 1984 73.00
14 1985 94.00
15 1986 89.00
16 1987 55.00
17 1988 48.00
18 1989 75.20
19 1990 86.90
20 1991 92.50
21 1992 102.40
22 1993 89.40
23 1994 79.00
24 1995 100.30
25 1996 93.20
26 1997 87.60
27 1998 101.10
28 2001 109.20
29 2002 114.60
30 2003 143.50
31 2004 147.30
Note: 1999, 2000, 2005 and 2006 Data not Available

Table-4.13
Estimated Rainfall at Jabbar for Jabori HPP
Extreme Value Gumble Method Log Pearson Type-

Return Period
Type I (mm) (mm) III (mm)
2 82.32 82.32 82.27

5 116.86 111.95 113.19
10 139.49 131.56 132.75
20 161.18
25 168.05 156.35 156.40
50 189.28 174.74 173.19
75 201.58
100 210.30 192.99 189.36
200 211.00 211.77 205.09
500 235.00 235.17
1000 279.83 253.30
Table 4.14
Flood Estimation for Jabori HPP
Floods Estimated From

Return Period Hydro-meteorological Approach
Sr.No. Regional Approach
HEC-HMS
(Years) m3/s m3/s
1 2 79.5
2 5 138.9 300.69
3 10 182.4 351.31
4 20 226.4
5 25 240.6
6 50 285.6
7 75 312.1
8 100 331.1 621.40
9 200 332.8
10 500 385.8
11 1000 487.1 835.19
12 10000 1047.59
1 of 2
Table-4.15
AVAILABLE SEDIMENT DATA OF UPPER INDUS RIVER CATCHMENT SWHP PUBLICATION NO: 57: SEDIMENT APPRIASAL OF PAKISTAN 1960-1998
Elevation Mean Mean

Station Catchment Annual Annual
Sr. No. River Latitude Longitude Remarks
Status Area (Km2) masl Sediment Sediment
2
million tons tons/ Km
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 Open Indus at Shatial 150219 1040 130 35o 31' 73o 33' 865 Fifteen years data 1984 to 1998
2 Open Indus at Besham Qila 162392 580 214 34o56' 72o53' 1318 The sediment transport computations may be treated as fair.
The sediment rating curves are not properly defined. Hence, the
3 Open Brandu River at Duggar 598 700 0.281 34o29 72o29 470
computations may be treated as fair.
The sediment computations for the year 1969 could not be made
4 Open Siran River near Phulra 1057 732 2.69 34o20 73o05 2546 as some of the high peaks were missing. The record may be
treated as fair.
Sediment transport computations are considered fair only.
Particularly all the suspended sediment is carried by the river
during four months, June to September. Coarser particles in the
5 Open Chitral River at Chitral 11396 1500 25.4 35o50 71o48 2229 suspended sediment predominate, this is probably due to fact that
principal flow of the river is caused by snow melt, high value of
observed concentration is probably due to inaccuracy of
observation.
Accuracy of the result is good below 10,000 cusecs flow and fair
above 10,000 cusecs. The river is carrying a very small quantity of
6 Open Swat River near Kalam 2020 1921 0.339 35o30 72o35 168 suspended sediment as compared to other streams in Pakistan.
This is justified by the consideration of the vegetal cover and the
principal source of flow being the snow melt.
Result below 30,000 cusecs are considered good and over

7 Open Swat River at Chakdara 5776 676 2.15 34o38 72o02 372
30,000 cusecs fair. The river behavoir is same as Swat at Kalam
8 Closed Indus River at Barsin 157471 154 35o18 73o16 978 The sediment transport concentrations are considered fair only
o o
9 Closed Gorband River near Karora 635 880 0.757 34 35 72 47 1193 The sediment transport computations are considered fair only.
Indus River at Mandori Record of flow and sediment transport is considered fair. The site
10 Closed 264179 219 33o47 72o15 829
(Attock) closed in 1997.
2 of 2
Table-4.15
AVAILABLE SEDIMENT DATA OF UPPER INDUS RIVER CATCHMENT SWHP PUBLICATION NO: 57: SEDIMENT APPRIASAL OF PAKISTAN 1960-1998
Elevation Mean Mean

Station Catchment Annual Annual
Sr. No. River Latitude Longitude Remarks
Status Area (Km2) masl Sediment Sediment
2
million tons tons/ Km
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Sediment transport computations are considered fair. The
11 Closed Haro River near Khanpur 777 1.46 33o48 72o54 1879 sediment sampling was stopped in the year 1992 and the site was
closed on 7th April, 1993.
12 Behran at Daral Khawar 275 1768 0.02 206 Data adopted from Daral Khwar HPP report
Source: SWHP, WAPDA

Table - 4.16
Mean Monthly and Annual Suspended Load of Siran River at Phulra (1969 - 2006)
Using Data SWHP, WAPDA
Months Suspended Sediment Load (Ton) Suspended Sediment Load (Ton/km 2)

Jan 20,209 19
Feb 92,957 88
Mar 387,399 367
Apr 270,094 256
May 69,677 66
Jun 24,014 23
Jul 472,940 447
Aug 428,259 405
Sep 258,497 245
Oct 45,938 43
Nov 14,513 14
Dec 20,615 20
Annual 2,105,114 1,992
Table - 4.17
Mean Monthly and Annual Suspended Load of Siran River at Jabori (1969 - 2006)
Using Data SWHP, WAPDA
Months Suspended Sediment Load (Ton) Suspended Sediment Load (Ton/km 2)

Jan 4,513 19
Feb 20,757 87
Mar 86,506 363
Apr 60,312 253
May 15,559 65
Jun 5,362 23
Jul 105,607 444
Aug 95,630 402
Sep 57,722 243
Oct 10,258 43
Nov 3,241 14
Dec 4,603 19
Annual 470,072 1,992
Table - 4.18
Calculated Mean Monthly and Annual Suspended Load of Siran River at Jabori (2005 - 2008)
Suspended Sediment Load (Metric Ton)
Year
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2005 - - 835 34970 21200 6335 6569 1394 455 2541 1244 3060 78,603
2006 617 4253 2628 8700 2437 555 94140 9193 369 237 499 404 124,030
2007 277 553 13371 23131 4571 7069 3449 3001 1648 401 229 78 57,778
2008 281 342 623 3220 911 8423 3591 4588 354 191 402 2880 25,808
Mean 391 1716 4364 17505 7280 5596 26937 4544 706 842 593 1605 71,555
Minimum 277 342 623 3220 911 555 3449 1394 354 191 229 78 25,808
Maximum 617 4253 13371 34970 21200 8423 94140 9193 1648 2541 1244 3060 124,030
Table-4.19
Comparison of Hydro-meteorological Parameters in Northern Areas of Pakistan
Elevation Mean Annual

Mean Annual
Station Catchment
Sr. No. River Sediment Latitude Longitude Sediment
Status Area (Km2) (masl) (million tons) (tons/ Km2)
1 Open Brandu River at Duggar 598 207 0.281 34o29 72o29 470
2 Open Siran River near Phulra 1057 762 2.69 34o20 73o05 2546
3 Open Swat River near Kalam 2020 1921 0.339 35o30 72o35 168
4 Open Swat River at Chakdara 5776 676 2.15 34o38 72o02 372
5 Closed Gorband River near Karora 635 491 0.757 34o35 72o47 1193
6 Behran at Daral Khawar 275 1768 0.02 206

Table-4.20
Comparison of Mean Monthly Suspended Load of Siran River at Jabori
Daral Khwar HPP Jabori HPP Using SWHP data Jabori HPP SHYDO Data
Months Sediment Specific Sediment Specific Sediment Specific

Discharges Discharges Discharges Discharges Discharges Discharges
Tons Tons/km2 Tons Tons/km2 Tons Tons/km2
Jan 373 1.39 4513 18.96 391 1.64

Feb 378 1.41 20757 87.22 1716 7.21
Mar 469 1.75 86506 363.47 4364 18.34
Apr 1233 4.60 60312 253.41 17505 73.55
May 4234 15.80 15559 65.37 7280 30.59
Jun 19701 73.51 5362 22.53 5596 23.51
Jul 18114 67.59 105607 443.73 26937 113.18
Aug 7978 29.77 95630 401.81 4544 19.09
Sep 1785 6.66 57722 242.53 706 2.97
Oct 574 2.14 10258 43.10 842 3.54
Nov 271 1.01 3241 13.62 593 2.49
Dec 306 1.14 4603 19.34 1605 6.75
Annual 55414 207 470072 1991.83 72081 303
Table-4.21
Comparison of Hydro-meteorological Parameters
Sr.No. Parameter Daral Khwar HPP Jabori HPP
1 Catchment Area (km 2) 268 236
2 Weir bed Elevation m 1480 1341
3 Top Elevation of the catchment m 4200 4287
4 Mean Annual Flows (m3/s) 10.76 7.24
5 Slope upto Weir site (%) 6.70 9.00

Table-4.22
Bedload Estimation for Jabori HPP
Daral Khwar HPP Jabori HPP

Sediment Specific Sediment Specific
Months
Discharges Discharges Discharges Discharges
Tons Tons/km2 Tons Tons/km2
Jan 0 0.00 0 0.00

Feb 0 0.00 0 0.00
Mar 36 0.13 29 0.12
Apr 422 1.57 338 1.43
May 23392 87.28 18714 79.29
Jun 102073 380.87 81658 346.01
Jul 43747 163.24 34998 148.29
Aug 392 1.46 314 1.33
Sep 0 0.00 0 0.00
Oct 0 0.00 0 0.00
Nov 0 0.00 0 0.00
Dec 0 0.00 0 0.00
Annual 170062 634.56 136050 576.48
FIGURES
Figure 4.3
Double Mass Curve for Rainfall Data (1974-2004)
50
40
30
20
Cumulative Annual Rainfall at Jabbar - 103 mm

10
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
3
Cumulative Annual Rainfall of 5 Stations -10 mm
Figure 4.4
Double Mass Curve for Rainfall Data (1963-2006)
60
50
3
40
30
20
Cumulative Annual Rainfall at Oghi - 10 mm

10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
3
Cumulative Average Annual Rainfall of 5 Stations -10 mm
Figure 4.5
Double Mass Curve for Discharge Data (1969-2006)
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
Cumulative Mean Annual Discharges of Siran River at Phulra- m3/s

0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000 50000
3
Cumulative Mean Annual Discharges of Indus River & Kunhar River - m /s
Figure 4.6
Observed Mean Monthly Flows for Siran River at Jabori (2005-2008)
10 9.62
8 7.73
7.50
7.09
6.90
6.49
6
5.53
3
4.94
4.50 4.50 4.61
4.25
Discharges-m /s
4
0
Months
Figure 4.7
Comparison of Runoff (Jabori-HPP)
120
Siran River Runoff at Jabori 2005-2008 (SHYDO)
Siran River Runoff at Phulra 1969-2006 (SWHP)
100
80
60
Runoff - mm
40
20
0
Months
Figure 4.8
Correlation of Observed Mean Monthly Discharges
12
3
6
Y=2.0594X0.3767
R2=0.6971
Discharges of Siran River at Jabori - m /s (SHYDO) 2005-08

0
0 10 20 30 40
Discharges of Siran River at Phulra - m3/s (SWHP)1969-06
Figure 4.9
Calculated Mean Monthly Net Flows at Weir Site (1969-08)
8
7.54
7.04 7.09
7 6.79
6.38
6
5.39 5.29 5.31
5
4.51
4.39
3
4.03 4.12
4
Discharges - m /s
3
0
Months
Figure 4.10
Calculated Mean Monthly Flows at Powerhouse Site (1969-08)
10
8.88
9
8.29 8.35
8.01
8
7.53
7
6.39 6.27 6.29
6
3
5.37
5.22
4.80 4.90
5
Discharges - m /s
4
0
Months
Figure 4.11
Mean Annual Net Flows of Siran River at Weir Site (1969-2008)
8
7 Mean Annual Net

Flow = 5.7 m3/s
Discharges - m3/s
2
0
1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007
Years
Figure 4.12
Mean Annual Flows of Siran River at Powerhouse (1969-2008)
9
Mean Annual
8
Flow = 6.7 m3/s
3
5
Discharges - m /s
3
0
1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007
Years
Figure 4.13
Percent Deviation from the Mean Annual Flow
40
35
30
25
20 Wet Years
15
10
5
0
Normal Years
-5
-10
-15
Slight Drought
-20
-25
-30
Percent Deviation from Mean Annual Flow

-35
Moderate Drought
-40
-45
-50
-55 Severe Drought
-60
1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007
Years
Figure 4.14
Flow Duration Curve Based on Net Daily Flows Jabori-HPP (1969-08)
30
25
20
15
Discharges - m3/s
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Time in Percentage
Figure 4.15
Rainfall Frequency Curve Jabori HPP
300
250
200
150
Rainfall - mm
100
Log. (Extreme Value Type I)

Log. (Gumble Method)
50
Log. (Log Pearson Type II)
0
0.1 1 10 100 1000
Return Period - Years

Figure 4.16
HEC-HMS Simuations of 1992 Flood
1600
Simulated
Observed
1400
1200
1000
3
800
Discharges - m /s
600
400
200
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Time - Hours
Figure 4.17
100 Years Return Period Flood for Jabori HPP
400
360
320
280
240
3
200
160
Discharges - m /s
120
80
40
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Time - Hours
Figure 4.18
Suspended Sediment Rating Curve of Siran River at Phulra (1961-2006)
100000
10000
Qs = 12.04 Qw1.898
For Qw > 95 Cumecs
1000 Qs = 10.17 x 10-3 Qw3.530

For 28 < Qw < 95 Cumecs
-3 2.925
Qs = 60.32 x 10 Qw
For Qw < 28 Cumecs
Discharge (m3/s)
100
10
1
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 10000000
Suspended Sediment (Metric Tons/Day)
Figure 4.19
Mean Monthly Distribution of Total Sediment Load at proposed Jabori Dam Site
100000
Annual Load = 0.21 MMT

80000
60000
40000
Total Sediment Load (M-Tons)

20000
0
Monthly Load 391 1716 4393 17843 25993 87254 61935 4858 706 842 593 1605
PART-4B
Post-Flood Hydrology
PART 4B
POST-FLOODS HYDROLOGY
4.1 General
Hydrology and Sedimentation Studies appeared as Chapter 4 in the Feasibility Report for
the Jabori Hydropower Project submitted by the Consultants (hereafter called Pre-flood
Report). Subsequently, a report describing the floods of 2010 was also submitted by the
Consultants to assess the magnitude of flood passed at the weir site and powerhouse site
of the hydropower project (hereafter called Second Report). As 2010 floods have shown
severe flooding almost all along the river Indus, hence, it was felt necessary that flood
studies should be reviewed in the light of flood magnitudes being passed over the weir and
powerhouse sites of the project. However, during the course it was also found desirable that
flow studies be also reviewed using a relatively longer data record up to the latest available.
This report (hereafter called Third Report) revises the previous flood and also reviews the
flow study for the weir site of the Jabori hydropower project considering the 2010 flood
scenario and recent flow data.
Pre-flood report describes mainly the data availability, flow generation for the weir and
powerhouse sites considering ecological flows, flood study for the weir site and
sedimentation studies for the proposed weir site. Flows at the weir site were generated by
developing correlation between mean monthly flows of Jabori for the 04 years (2005-2008)
and mean monthly flows of Phulra stream gauging station for 38 years (1969-2006). Using
the flow data of Phulra, flow data for Jabori weir site was generated for 36 years (1969-
2004), as observed data at Jabori was available for 04 years (2005-2008).
Second report contains the estimation of flood at the proposed weir site of Jabori
hydropower project using past flood marks approach. This report was prepared after
physically visiting the site two times by the team members of the Consultants, first field visit
was managed in August 2010 and second in September, 2010. In this report recorded daily
rainfalls during the months of July and August 2010 at various climatological stations are
presented. Moreover, floods hydrographs at various important locations of the river Indus
are also presented. The damages occurred in the region are also documented. Highest
flood marks attained at the sites were identified by physically inspecting the river banks and
by making interviews with the senior local occupants of the area. X, Y, Z coordinates were
determined for plotting the highest flood mark and cross section of the river on the paper at
three locations. Area of flows and wetted perimeters were retrieved from the prepared
drawing sheets. Taking this data, hydraulics radii were computed. Longitudinal slope of the
river at these sites were determined by differential leveling. Considering the site conditions,
an appropriate value of Mannings n was selected. Finally, velocity of flows and peak flood
discharges for 2010 were estimated at these sites. However, the computed peak flood value
for section B-B needs correction. The frequency of occurrence of 2010 flood was also
computed. This report also describes the effects of 2010 flood on project area, moreover,
additional work required for the revision of feasibility study was also discussed.
4-1
This report reviews the flood and flow studies for the Jabori hydropower project given in
earlier reports and revises them considering 2010 flood scenario and longer flow data
record. As the highest one day rainfall (187 mm on 29th July, 2010) at Saidu Sharif and
highest river discharge in 2010 at the weir site were available in the Second Report, hence
flood study for the Jabori hydropower project was revised considering this information and
presented in the this report.
For the present study, flow data of Phulra stream gauging station for years 2007-2008 was
collected from SWHP, WAPDA. Flows at the weir site were generated by developing
correlation between mean monthly flows of Jabori for the 03 years (2006-2008) and mean
monthly flows of Phulra stream gauging stations for the same 03 years (2006-2008). Flow
data of 2005 was not used in this study as it was not available for first three months, i.e.
January to March, 2005. The developed scatter diagram and best fitted curve has shown
good correlation between flows of Jabori and Phulra stream gauging stations. Using the
flow data of Phulra, flow data for Jabori weir site was generated for 37 years (1969-2005),
as observed data was available completely for 03 years (2006-2008).
4.2 Flood Study
Flood studies are covered in this report by briefing the flood studies presented in the earlier
reports. Finally present flood study is discussed in the light of gathered information from
these reports.
4.2.1 First Report Flood (Pre-flood) Study
Floods for the Jabori weir site were computed by using following two approaches.
4.2.1.1. Hydro-meteorological Approach
For the estimation of floods using hydro-meteorological approach, initially rainfall runoff
modeling was carried out for the flood event of 1992 for Siran river at Phulra having
catchment area of 1057 km2 using HEC-HMS Model. The main purpose of the rainfall-runoff
modeling was to calibrate the Model and to determine the value of the SCS Curve Number
against computed values of parameters like Time of concentration, Time of peak and SCS
Lag time for the Phulra watershed, which were separately estimated as 70, 6.82 hrs, 4.59
hrs and 245 min, respectively. Calibration was done by obtaining the computed peak flood
equal to the observed one (1406.3 m3/s) at Phulra stream gauging station. The result of the
calibration of the HEC-HMS Model is shown in Figure-4.16 in the Pre-flood report.
Rainfall Frequency Analysis was carried out for the annual maximum 24 hours rainfalls for
31 years (1969-2004) of Jabbar climatological station to estimate the rainfalls corresponding
to various return periods using Extreme Value Type I, Gumbel and Log Pearson Type III
frequency distribution functions. The results of the rainfall frequency analysis are shown in
Table-4.13 and Figure-4.15 in the Pre-flood report.
4-2
Hourly analysis of Jabbar rainfall data was not possible for 1992, as hourly data was not
available for the rainstorm of the year, hence hourly distribution of the rainstorm was kept
same as Oghi which is a nearby station having hourly data record.
Using the computed rainfall amounts against various return periods (2, 5, 10, 50, 100, 500,
1000, 10000), flood peaks were estimated using USBR Method. The results of the method
for various return period floods are given in Table-4.14 of the Pre-flood report.
4.2.1.2. GTZ Regional Analysis Approach
GTZ had collected instantaneous maximum discharge data of various stream gauging
stations of Northern areas of Pakistan including snowmelt runoff and glacier melt runoff
watersheds (which have no hydro-meteorological similarity with the study area) and had
developed correlations for the peak floods as a function of watershed areas for various
return periods. Regression equations were developed for each return period by the GTZ
and are given in the Pre-flood report as below:
Q5 11.97 A (1)
0.59
Q10 15.60 A (2)

0.57
Q100 40.45 A (3)

0.50
Q1000 64.05 A (4)

0.47
Q10000 84.85 A (5)

0.48
Where Q is the maximum instantaneous discharge (m3/s) and its subscript is the return
period and A is the watershed area in km2.
These equations were used for the estimation of floods corresponding to various return
periods. The results of the GTZ approach for flood magnitudes are also presented in Table-
4.14.
Table-4.14 shows that GTZ Regional Analysis Approach yields higher values for floods
against various return periods for the study area and hence are recommended for the site.
The computed 1000 and 10000 return period floods were estimated as 835 and 1048 m3/s,
respectively.
4.2.2 Second Report Flood Study
2010 floods at the proposed weir site at three locations (A-A, B-B & C-C) of Jabori
hydropower project were estimated using past flood marks approach. Highest flood marks
attained at the sites were identified by physically inspecting the river banks and by making
interviews with the senior local occupants of the area. Area of flows and wetted perimeters
4-3
were determined from the prepared drawing sheets. Taking this data, hydraulics radii were
computed. Bed slopes of the river at these sites were computed by determining the bed
levels of two sections at a known distance apart (leveling). Considering the site conditions,
an appropriate value of Mannings n was selected. Finally, velocity of flows and peak flood
discharges for 2010 were estimated at these sites.
The computed peak floods at these three sections are presented in tabular form in the
Second Report. A quick look over the calculations show that the computed peak flood value
for the section B-B needs to be corrected to 516 m3/s.
The maximum discharges at three locations for 2010 floods were re-computed and are
presented below:
Section A P R n S V Q
m2 m m m/s m3/s
A-A 52.61 54.1 0.972 0.035 0.0128 3.2 166.9
B-B 105 55.94 1.877 0.035 0.0128 4.9 516.2
C-C 66.46 56.16 1.183 0.035 0.0128 3.6 240.3
The above Table shows that the maximum discharge passed through the river cross section
at Jabori weir site during 2010 floods was 516 m3/s. Moreover, the flood magnitudes
computed for sections A-A and C-C are lower because their identified flood marks were
lower than the highest.
Second Report also describes that the flood magnitude passed in 2010 at the site was less
than the 1 in 100 years flood.
4.2.3 Present Flood (Post-flood) Study
In the present flood study, floods for the Jabori weir site were computed by using following
three approaches.
(3) Local Regional Analysis Approach
4.2.3.1. Hydro-meteorological Approach
For the estimation of floods using hydro-meteorological approach, same value of SCS
Curve No. of 70 was used for the Jabori watershed which was determined after calibration
in the earlier study.
Rainfall Frequency Analysis was revised for the annual maximum 24 hours rainfalls for 31
years (1969-2004) of Jabbar climatological station to estimate the rainfalls corresponding to
various return periods using Gumbel Extreme Value Type I, Log Pearson Type III and
4-4
Lognormal frequency distribution functions. The results of the rainfall frequency analysis are
shown below:
Gumbel Ext Pearson

Return Log Normal
Type 1 TypeIII
period (mm)
(mm) (mm)
2 83.0 84.8 84.5
5 114.9 113.8 113.9
10 136.1 130.7 131.5
50 182.7 163.7 166.6
100 202.4 176.4 180.4
500 247.9 203.7 210.9
1,000 267.4 214.8 223.6
10,000 332.4 249.8 264.8
These computed values of maximum 24 hours rainfalls corresponding to various return

periods are slightly different than those given in Pre-flood report.
Hourly analysis of Jabbar rainfall data was not possible for 1992, as hourly data was not
available for the rainstorm of the year, hence hourly distribution of the rainstorm was kept
same as Oghi which is a nearby station having hourly data record.
One additional step in this study was the verification of 2010 flood by USBR Method. As
maximum annual daily rainfall amount at the Saidu Sharif (187 mm) and maximum flood at
the weir site was known from the past flood marks approach (516 m3/s), by tuning the
infiltration calibrating parameter of the USBR Model, the method results were brought closer
to the observed flood passed at the site on 29th July, 2010. The observed flood was 516
m3/s, whereas, the computed was 515 m3/s, which shows a good agreement between the
observed and computed values. This additional calibration of the Model has given a great
confidence in computing the other values of floods corresponding to various return periods.
Using the computed rainfall amounts against various return periods (2, 5, 10, 50, 100, 500,
1000, 10000), flood peaks were estimated using calibrated USBR Method / Model. The
results of the method for various return period floods are presented in the Table-4.23, which
shows that predicted values of the floods are on higher side as compared to the flood
values presented in Pre-flood report using the same method.
Floods at the proposed Jabori hydropower project site computed using hydro-
meteorological approach are shown in the Figure given below.
4-5
1000
900
800
700
Flood (cumecs)
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1 10 100 1000
Return Period (Years)
This Figure shows that the 2010 flood occurred at the weir site location was having a
recurrence interval of about 62 years.
4.2.3.2. GTZ Regional Analysis Approach
As the GTZ equations used for the estimation of floods for various return periods were
same as used in the Pre-flood report, hence the same results were obtained for the flood
magnitudes corresponding to various return periods.
4.2.3.3. Local Regional Analysis Approach
As for the hydrological studies, Consultants had collected instantaneous maximum flows for
each year at 5 stream gauging stations, i.e. Phulra, Besham Qila, Gorband, Kalam and
Chakdara, the same data were used to determine the flood magnitudes corresponding to
various return periods for each station by carrying out the flood frequency analysis using
Gumbel Method and is shown in the Table below:
Gauging Data Estimated flood by using Gumbel Distirbution (cumecs)

Source
Station Years 5 10 20 100 500 1000 10000
Phulra SWHP 37 1193 1572 1934 2756 3569 3919 5080
Besham SWHP 28 11786 12739 13654 15726 17777 18658 21585
Gorband SWHP 29 396 529 656 944 1229 1351 1758
Kalam SWHP 47 485 563 638 808 976 1048 1288
Chakdara SWHP 46 982 1152 1315 1683 2048 2205 2726
It is noted that the stream gauging stations used for the development of regional equations
have more similarity with the hydro-meteorological characteristics of the Jabori watershed.
And hence Local Regional Analysis Approach is more reliable for the study area as
compared to GTZ Regional Analysis Approach.
4-6
Flood Frequency Distribution curves were plotted for each return period, and flood
estimation equations were developed for various return periods which are given below:
Q5 11.649 A (6)
0.5961
Q10 19.044 A (7)

0.5603
Q20 27.321 A (8)

0.5352
Q100 49.426 A (9)

0.4966
Q500 74.746 A (10)

0.4718
Q1000 86.429 A (11)

0.4637
Q10000 127.800 A (12)

0.44
Where Q is the maximum instantaneous discharge (m3/s) and its subscript is the return
period and A is the watershed area in km2.
The results of the Local Regional Approach for flood magnitudes corresponding to various
return periods are also presented in Table-4.23.
Table-4.23 shows that Local Regional Analysis Approach yields higher values of floods
against larger return periods and smaller values of floods for lower return periods as
compared to GTZ Regional Analysis Approach. The computed 1000 and 10,000 return
period floods were estimated as 846 and 1115 m3/s, respectively.
4.3 Flow Study
Flow study presented in the Pre-flood report for the Jabori hydropower project is briefed in
Section 4.2, whereas, present flow study is described in Section 4.10.2.
4.3.1 Pre-Flood Report Flow Study
As discussed earlier, flows at the weir site were generated by developing correlation
between mean monthly flows of Jabori for the 04 years (2005-2008) and mean monthly
flows of Phulra stream gauging station for 38 years (1969-2006). The developed correlation
is shown in Figure-4.8 of the Pre-flood report. Coefficient of correlation (R2) was 0.6971 with
the following equation for generating the flows at Jabori weir site.
Qweir 2.0594 Q phulra (13)

0.3767
4-7
Using the flow data of Phulra stream gauging station, flow data for Jabori weir site was
generated for 36 years (1969-2004), as observed data at Jabori was available for 04 years
(2005-2008). Ecological flows were computed using the CEMAGREF equation as given in
Pre-flood. Subtracting ecological flows from the total flows at the weir site, net flows at the
weir site were computed. Computed mean monthly net flows at the weir site are presented
in the Table-4.8 of the Pre-flood report.
The computed mean annual net flow is 5.7 m3/s. Total mean annual net flow or mean
annual volume of water at the weir site was computed as 178 Mm3.
However in the approach used for the estimation of flows at the weir site, concurrent mean
monthly flows could not be used for developing the correlation between mean monthly flows
at the Jabori weir site and mean monthly flows at Phulra stream gauging station. This was
due to non availability of flow data of Phulra stream gauging station for years 2007 & 2008.
Figures-4.9 to 4.14 of Pre-flood report show the calculated mean monthly net flows at weir
site, calculated mean monthly net flows at powerhouse site, mean annual net flows at weir
site, mean annual net flows at powerhouse site, percent deviation from the mean annual
flow and flow duration curve based on net daily flows for Jabori weir site, respectively.
4.3.2 Present Flow Study
For the flow generation at the Jabori weir site, first of all flow data for Phulra stream gauging
station was collected for years 2007 & 2008 from SWHP, WAPDA. Flows at the weir site
were generated by developing correlation between mean monthly flows of Jabori for the 03
years (2006-2008) and mean monthly flows of Phulra stream gauging stations for the same
03 years (2006-2008). Flow data of 2005 was not used in this study as it was not available
for first three months, i.e. January to March, 2005. The developed scatter diagram and best
fitted curve is shown in Figure-4.20. Correlation coefficient between flows of Jabori and
flows of Phulra stream gauging station was 0.74 which shows that correlation has become
stronger as compared to results shown in the Pre-flood report.
On the basis of non-linear regression analysis, equation (14) was suggested to compute
flows for the Jabori weir site.
Qweir 2.05 Q phulra (14)

0.36
To check the adequacy of the equation, mean monthly generated flows of three years
(2006-2008) were compared with the observed mean monthly flows at Jabori and are
shown in Figure-4.21. The generated mean monthly flows match well except for the months
of April and December. For April, the computed flows are under estimated and for
December it is overestimated, however, the mean annual flow remains within the
acceptable limits.
Using the flow data of Phulra, flow data for Jabori weir site was generated for 37 years
(1969-2005), as observed data was available for 03 years (2006-2008).
4-8
Ecological flows were computed using the same CEMAGREF equation as given in the Pre-
flood report. Subtracting ecological flows from the total flows at the weir site, net flows at the
weir site were computed. Computed mean monthly net flows at the weir and powerhouse
sites are presented in the Table-4.24 & 4.25, respectively.
The computed mean annual flow, mean annual ecological flow and mean annual net flow
are 5.58 m3/s, 0.132 m3/s and 5.45 m3/s, respectively. Total mean annual net flow or mean
annual volume of water at the weir site was computed as 171.75 Mm3.
Figures-4.22 to 4.26 show the calculated mean monthly net flows at weir site, calculated
mean monthly net flows at powerhouse site, mean annual net flows at weir site, mean
annual net flows at powerhouse site and flow duration curve based on net daily flows for
Jabori weir site, respectively.
Moreover, flow duration curve in tabular form based on net daily flows at the weir site is
given below:
Design Discharge
S. No. Percentage Exceedance
m3/s
1 0 42.72
2 10 7.79
3 20 6.79
4 30 6.03
5 35 5.72
6 40 5.45
7 50 4.96
8 60 4.55
9 70 4.23
10 80 3.91
11 90 3.56
12 100 0.00
4.4 Conclusions
Due to the availability of Second Report for the study area, floods at the weir site were re-
computed with a greater confidence level.
For the estimation of floods at the site, Hydro-meteorological Approach has been proved to
be the most reliable as Curve Number was estimated on the basis of calibrating the HEC-
HMS Model and its result was validated for the 2010 flood, hence this approach is
recommended for the estimation of floods against medium and higher return periods for the
Jabori weir site. Using this approach, 100, 1000 and 10,000 years return period floods were
estimated as 600, 971 and 1093 m3/s, respectively.
For lower return periods, results of the Local Regional Analysis Approach are
recommended for the Jabori HPP site being on higher side. Using this approach, 05 and 10
years return period floods were estimated as 238 and 319 m3/s, respectively.
4-9
Results of the flood frequency analysis reveal that the flood passed at the proposed Jabori
hydropower project location was having a recurrence interval of about 62 years.
Floods presented in the Pre-flood report are slightly lower than the presently computed
flood values. This change has appeared due to giving due considerations to 2010 flood
magnitude which was estimated by using past flood mark approach in the Second Report.
Mean Annual Flows, Mean Annual Ecological Flows and Mean Annual Net Flows for the
proposed Jabori weir site were estimated as 5.58 m3/s, 0.132 m3/s and 5.45 m3/s,
respectively.
Mean Annual Net Flows presented in the Pre-flood report are slightly higher than the
presently computed Mean Annual Net Flows, i.e. 5.70 and 5.45 m3/s, respectively. It is due
to using a different regression model for the estimation of flows developed on the basis of
concurrent flow data records on both stations. Moreover, years 2007 and 2008 were
relatively low flow years for Phulra which were added for the present study.
It is however to be noted that this slight reduction in the mean annual net flows should not
warrant any change in the hydropower parameters already computed in the Pre-flood
report.
4 - 10
TABLES
Table-4.23
Flood Estimation For Jabori HPP
Floods Estimated (m3/s)

Hydro-
Return Period meteorological Local
Sr.No. GTZ Regional
Approach Regional
Approach
Approach
HEC-HMS
(Years) m3/s m3/s m3/s
1 2 45.4
2 5 159.5 300.7 238
3 10 254.9 351.3 319
4 20
5 25
6 50 491.5 398
7 75
8 100 600.2 621.4 581
9 200
10 500 857.7 766
11 1000 970.7 835.2 846
12 10000 1093.1 1047.6 1115

Table-4.24
Table - 2
Calculated Mean Monthly Net Flows for Siran River at Jabori Weir Site (1969-2008)
S. No. Year
1 1969 4.130 5.974 7.158 7.112 6.461 4.872 5.045 6.670 4.512 5.486 4.616 3.741 5.48 172.86 0.14
2 1970 4.067 4.616 6.582 6.041 4.637 3.471 5.152 6.655 7.849 5.187 3.543 3.421 5.10 160.89 0.13
3 1971 3.140 4.286 5.096 5.359 4.224 6.435 5.595 6.577 4.589 3.556 3.700 3.452 4.67 147.20 0.12
4 1972 4.142 4.935 6.979 7.264 6.981 5.130 5.077 6.081 4.994 4.192 3.775 4.079 5.30 167.21 0.14
5 1973 4.806 6.042 8.219 7.390 5.959 5.094 5.951 6.791 4.906 4.425 3.595 3.686 5.57 175.72 0.14
6 1974 3.760 4.501 5.611 5.629 4.613 4.110 5.736 5.550 4.167 3.629 2.823 3.536 4.47 141.03 0.11
7 1975 3.451 5.110 6.360 6.813 6.158 4.906 6.244 9.068 6.078 4.368 3.808 4.056 5.54 174.55 0.14
8 1976 4.384 6.138 7.179 8.419 7.094 5.968 8.372 9.617 5.780 5.266 4.323 4.108 6.39 201.43 0.16
9 1977 5.013 4.794 5.064 6.457 6.121 6.078 10.340 7.287 6.285 6.092 4.838 4.564 6.08 191.66 0.16
10 1978 4.854 5.256 6.956 7.134 6.492 5.297 7.991 9.267 5.735 4.819 5.034 4.421 6.10 192.51 0.16
11 1979 4.490 4.880 6.471 7.785 6.109 4.579 5.912 5.040 4.228 3.826 3.815 3.467 5.05 159.26 0.13
12 1980 4.405 6.107 7.308 7.552 6.086 5.858 5.881 6.016 4.846 4.084 3.680 3.734 5.46 172.29 0.14
13 1981 3.814 4.964 7.928 8.576 6.639 4.466 6.323 6.646 3.832 4.443 3.510 3.275 5.37 169.29 0.14
14 1982 3.291 4.476 6.938 7.238 7.222 5.553 5.942 7.779 3.665 4.442 4.446 4.337 5.44 171.68 0.14
15 1983 4.315 4.373 7.207 8.037 7.577 5.738 6.011 6.917 6.162 4.243 3.589 3.589 5.65 178.07 0.14
16 1984 3.604 3.917 5.667 6.666 5.086 4.053 5.261 7.163 6.101 4.104 3.840 3.975 4.95 156.20 0.13
17 1985 4.468 4.291 4.627 5.476 4.614 3.183 6.867 6.112 3.707 3.963 3.360 4.901 4.63 146.04 0.12
18 1986 4.193 5.136 7.746 7.779 6.819 5.854 6.141 7.317 4.749 4.333 5.712 5.724 5.96 187.91 0.15
19 1987 4.653 5.606 8.044 7.965 7.073 5.935 5.184 5.500 4.210 7.536 4.317 4.334 5.86 184.90 0.15
20 1988 4.297 4.911 7.415 6.739 5.288 3.604 9.649 8.284 5.282 4.174 3.585 4.075 5.61 176.87 0.14
21 1989 4.558 4.098 5.091 6.574 6.820 4.602 7.115 7.131 4.602 4.386 3.906 4.088 5.25 165.49 0.13
22 1990 4.566 6.475 7.870 7.808 6.962 4.896 6.014 7.465 5.547 4.462 3.939 6.679 6.06 191.01 0.15
23 1991 6.566 8.546 9.465 9.913 8.333 6.703 7.315 6.511 6.575 4.568 3.761 3.853 6.84 215.78 0.18
24 1992 6.043 6.459 8.229 8.272 7.445 5.999 7.611 6.692 10.136 5.818 5.087 4.599 6.87 216.52 0.18
25 1993 5.265 5.720 8.433 7.371 6.451 5.491 8.736 5.067 5.422 3.834 4.477 3.562 5.82 183.51 0.15
26 1994 4.097 5.271 6.759 8.425 6.778 5.310 8.398 7.987 4.961 4.847 4.121 5.038 6.00 189.20 0.15
27 1995 4.512 5.061 6.987 7.908 6.691 5.402 9.448 7.935 4.814 4.164 3.791 4.200 5.91 186.36 0.15
28 1996 4.265 5.703 8.934 7.791 6.713 6.021 5.833 7.082 4.486 4.717 3.437 3.992 5.75 181.27 0.15
29 1997 3.796 3.664 5.091 8.125 6.780 6.528 6.749 9.067 6.885 5.065 4.465 4.138 5.86 184.89 0.15
30 1998 4.474 8.053 8.381 9.023 7.400 4.935 5.956 4.961 4.856 3.812 3.406 3.226 5.71 179.98 0.15
31 1999 3.874 4.495 6.350 6.056 4.616 3.213 5.094 6.248 4.539 3.624 4.786 3.577 4.71 148.40 0.12
32 2000 4.118 4.455 4.805 5.104 3.974 3.963 5.884 6.208 4.359 3.983 3.033 3.213 4.42 139.54 0.11
33 2001 3.165 2.575 3.238 4.753 3.553 4.215 5.828 5.033 4.168 3.039 3.835 3.036 3.87 122.04 0.10
34 2002 3.623 4.044 5.231 5.289 4.097 3.804 3.851 6.623 4.328 2.824 2.557 2.906 4.10 129.24 0.10
35 2003 3.052 5.700 7.463 8.247 6.563 5.208 5.628 5.378 5.118 3.990 3.388 3.770 5.29 166.89 0.14
36 2004 4.281 4.978 4.996 4.426 4.379 4.102 4.797 4.837 4.464 4.444 3.734 3.683 4.43 139.60 0.11
37 2005 4.619 7.964 8.989 7.213 7.013 5.829 5.913 4.895 3.373 4.352 3.950 3.091 5.60 176.61 0.14
38 2006 4.800 7.337 6.889 8.384 6.675 4.697 7.902 7.830 4.148 3.796 4.456 4.231 5.93 186.97 0.15
39 2007 3.941 4.731 7.039 10.047 7.421 7.054 6.278 5.991 4.962 3.948 3.601 2.755 5.65 178.09 0.14
40 2008 3.618 4.173 4.809 6.979 5.186 6.632 6.879 5.965 3.865 3.501 4.213 5.430 5.10 160.97 0.13
Maximum 6.57 8.55 9.47 10.05 8.33 7.05 10.34 9.62 10.14 7.54 5.71 6.68 8.34 262.88 0.21
Minimum 3.05 2.58 3.24 4.43 3.55 3.18 3.85 4.84 3.37 2.82 2.56 2.76 3.35 105.71 0.09
Mean 4.26 5.25 6.74 7.23 6.13 5.12 6.50 6.73 5.08 4.38 3.95 3.99 5.45 171.75 0.14
Standard Dev. 0.71 1.23 1.42 1.30 1.18 1.01 1.43 1.26 1.26 0.84 0.63 0.78 0.67 21.28 0.02
No of Days 31 28.25 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31
Volume (MCM) 11 13 18 19 16 13 17 18 13 12 10 11
Table-4.25
Table - 3
Calculated Mean Monthly Net Flows for Siran River at Jabori Powerhouse Site (1969-2008)
3
Mean Monthly Flows (m /s) Annual Flow
S. No. Year
1 1969 4.919 7.115 8.525 8.470 7.695 5.803 6.009 7.944 5.374 6.535 5.498 4.456 6.53 205.89 0.17
2 1970 4.844 5.498 7.839 7.195 5.522 4.134 6.136 7.926 9.348 6.177 4.220 4.074 6.08 191.62 0.16
3 1971 3.740 5.105 6.070 6.383 5.031 7.665 6.664 7.833 5.465 4.236 4.407 4.112 5.56 175.32 0.14
4 1972 4.933 5.878 8.312 8.651 8.314 6.110 6.047 7.243 5.948 4.992 4.496 4.859 6.32 199.16 0.16
5 1973 5.724 7.197 9.789 8.802 7.097 6.067 7.088 8.089 5.844 5.270 4.281 4.391 6.64 209.29 0.17
6 1974 4.479 5.361 6.683 6.705 5.494 4.895 6.832 6.611 4.963 4.322 3.362 4.211 5.33 167.98 0.14
7 1975 4.110 6.086 7.575 8.115 7.334 5.843 7.436 10.801 7.239 5.203 4.535 4.831 6.59 207.90 0.17
8 1976 5.222 7.311 8.551 10.027 8.449 7.109 9.971 11.455 6.884 6.272 5.149 4.893 7.61 239.92 0.19
9 1977 5.971 5.709 6.032 7.690 7.290 7.239 12.315 8.679 7.485 7.256 5.762 5.436 7.24 228.28 0.19
10 1978 5.781 6.260 8.285 8.497 7.732 6.309 9.517 11.037 6.831 5.739 5.996 5.266 7.27 229.29 0.19
11 1979 5.348 5.813 7.708 9.272 7.276 5.454 7.041 6.003 5.035 4.557 4.543 4.130 6.02 189.69 0.15
12 1980 5.246 7.273 8.704 8.995 7.249 6.978 7.005 7.166 5.772 4.864 4.383 4.448 6.51 205.20 0.17
13 1981 4.543 5.912 9.443 10.214 7.907 5.320 7.531 7.915 4.564 5.292 4.181 3.901 6.39 201.63 0.16
14 1982 3.919 5.331 8.263 8.621 8.602 6.614 7.077 9.265 4.365 5.291 5.295 5.166 6.48 204.48 0.17
15 1983 5.139 5.208 8.584 9.573 9.024 6.834 7.160 8.238 7.339 5.054 4.275 4.275 6.73 212.09 0.17
16 1984 4.292 4.665 6.749 7.939 6.058 4.828 6.266 8.532 7.266 4.888 4.573 4.734 5.90 186.04 0.15
17 1985 5.322 5.110 5.511 6.522 5.495 3.791 8.179 7.280 4.416 4.720 4.002 5.837 5.52 173.94 0.14
18 1986 4.994 6.117 9.226 9.265 8.122 6.973 7.314 8.715 5.656 5.160 6.803 6.818 7.10 223.81 0.18
19 1987 5.542 6.677 9.581 9.487 8.425 7.069 6.174 6.551 5.014 8.976 5.141 5.162 6.98 220.22 0.18
20 1988 5.118 5.850 8.831 8.027 6.298 4.292 11.492 9.866 6.291 4.972 4.270 4.854 6.68 210.66 0.17
21 1989 5.429 4.881 6.064 7.829 8.123 5.481 8.474 8.493 5.481 5.224 4.653 4.869 6.25 197.10 0.16
22 1990 5.438 7.712 9.374 9.299 8.292 5.832 7.162 8.891 6.607 5.315 4.692 7.955 7.21 227.50 0.18
23 1991 7.820 10.178 11.273 11.806 9.925 7.984 8.713 7.755 7.831 5.441 4.479 4.589 8.15 257.00 0.21
24 1992 7.198 7.692 9.801 9.852 8.867 7.145 9.065 7.971 12.072 6.929 6.058 5.478 8.18 257.88 0.21
25 1993 6.271 6.813 10.044 8.779 7.684 6.541 10.405 6.035 6.458 4.566 5.332 4.243 6.93 218.57 0.18
26 1994 4.880 6.278 8.050 10.035 8.073 6.324 10.002 9.513 5.909 5.772 4.908 6.001 7.15 225.34 0.18
27 1995 5.374 6.027 8.322 9.419 7.970 6.434 11.253 9.451 5.733 4.960 4.515 5.002 7.04 221.96 0.18
28 1996 5.079 6.793 10.641 9.279 7.995 7.171 6.948 8.435 5.343 5.618 4.094 4.755 6.85 215.89 0.18
29 1997 4.521 4.364 6.064 9.677 8.076 7.776 8.039 10.799 8.200 6.032 5.318 4.929 6.98 220.21 0.18
30 1998 5.329 9.592 9.982 10.747 8.814 5.878 7.094 5.909 5.783 4.540 4.057 3.842 6.80 214.36 0.17
31 1999 4.614 5.354 7.563 7.213 5.497 3.827 6.067 7.442 5.406 4.316 5.700 4.260 5.60 176.76 0.14
32 2000 4.904 5.306 5.723 6.078 4.733 4.721 7.008 7.394 5.192 4.744 3.612 3.827 5.27 166.20 0.13
33 2001 3.770 3.067 3.856 5.661 4.232 5.021 6.941 5.995 4.964 3.620 4.568 3.616 4.61 145.35 0.12
34 2002 4.315 4.816 6.230 6.300 4.879 4.531 4.586 7.888 5.155 3.363 3.045 3.462 4.88 153.92 0.12
35 2003 3.635 6.789 8.889 9.822 7.816 6.203 6.703 6.405 6.096 4.752 4.036 4.490 6.30 198.77 0.16
36 2004 5.099 5.930 5.951 5.272 5.216 4.885 5.713 5.762 5.317 5.293 4.448 4.386 5.27 166.27 0.13
37 2005 5.502 9.485 10.706 8.591 8.353 6.943 7.043 5.831 4.017 5.183 4.705 3.682 6.67 210.34 0.17
38 2006 5.717 8.739 8.205 9.986 7.950 5.595 9.411 9.326 4.941 4.522 5.307 5.039 7.06 222.69 0.18
39 2007 4.694 5.635 8.384 11.966 8.839 8.402 7.478 7.135 5.909 4.703 4.288 3.282 6.73 212.12 0.17
40 2008 4.309 4.971 5.728 8.313 6.177 7.898 8.194 7.104 4.604 4.170 5.018 6.467 6.08 191.72 0.16
Maximum 7.82 10.18 11.27 11.97 9.93 8.40 12.32 11.45 12.07 8.98 6.80 7.95 9.93 313.10 0.25
Minimum 3.63 3.07 3.86 5.27 4.23 3.79 4.59 5.76 4.02 3.36 3.05 3.28 3.99 125.90 0.10
Mean 5.08 6.25 8.03 8.61 7.30 6.10 7.74 8.02 6.05 5.22 4.70 4.75 6.49 204.56 0.17
Standard Dev. 0.84 1.46 1.69 1.55 1.41 1.20 1.70 1.50 1.50 1.00 0.75 0.93 0.80 25.34 0.02
No of Days 31 28.25 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31
Volume (MCM) 14 15 22 22 20 16 21 21 16 14 12 13
FIGURES
Figure-4.20
Figure 1: Correlation of Observed Mean Monthly Discharges
10
4
y = 2.05x 0.36
3 R2 = 0.74
Flows at Jabori (cumecs), SHYDO (2005-2008)

1
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Flows at Phulra (cumecs), SWHP (2005-2008)
Figure-4.21
Figure 2: Comparison between generated and observed mean monthly flows
10
9
8 Observed
7 Computed
5
4
3
Flows at Jabori (cumecs)

2
1
0
Months
Figure-4.22
Figure 3: Calculated Mean Monthly Net Flows at Weir Site (1969-2008)

10
9 Mean Monthly Flows
Mean Flow
8 7.23
6.74 6.50 6.73
7
6.13
6 5.25 5.12 5.08
5 4.26 4. 38
3.95 3.99
4
Flows (cumecs)
3
2
1
0
Months
Figure-4.23
Figure 4: Calculated Mean Monthly Net Flows at Powerhouse Site

(1969-2008)
10
9 8.61
8.03 8.02 Mean Monthly Flows
7.74 Mean Flow
8 7.30
7 6.25 6.10 6.05
6 5.22
5.08
4.70 4.75
5
4
Flows (cumecs)
3
2
1
0
Months
Figure-4.24
Figure 5: Mean Annual Net Flows at weir site (1969-2008)

8
Annual Flows
7 Mean Annual Flows
6
5
4
3
Discharge (m 3/s)
2
1
0
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
Years
Figure-4.25
Figure 6: Mean Annual Net Flows at Powerhouse site (1969-2008)

9
Annual Flows
8 Mean Annual Flows
7
Discharge (m 3/s)
3
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
Years
Figure-4.26
Figure 7:
Flow Duration Curve Based on Net Daily Flows Jabori-HPP (1969-08)
45
40
35
30
3
25
20
Discharges - m /s
15
10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Time in Percentage
CHAPTER
5
SEISMIC HAZARD EVALUATION

CHAPTER 5
SEISMIC HAZARD EVALUATION
5.1 General
Earthquakes are generally caused by the release of accumulated stresses in the earths
crust. These stresses build up due to crustal deformation resulting from the movement of
continental plates, and are released along faults causing rupture of the crust. Therefore, the
occurrence of earthquakes is not merely a random phenomenon but is governed mainly by
elastic and tectonic processes. Location map of Project sites with respect to Seismic
Hazards is shown in Figure-5.1.
According to Basin Architecture Map (Figure-5.2) and Tectonic Map of Pakistan and
Northern Areas (Figure5.3 & 5.4) the site is located in a highly seismically active area
affected by the continuing northward drifting of the Indian plate and its subduction below the
southern flank of Eurasian plate. The collision of the two plates began about 50 million
years ago and the full contact between them was completed about 40 million years ago. Yet
the Indian plate keeps on slowly drifting northward. As the Indian plate subducts below the
Eurasian plate, its top surface layers get peeled off and folded back. This has resulted in
the production of a crustal accretion wedge, the Himalayan Range, and this deformation is
continuing at the rate of about 2-4 cm per year. The accreted wedge is made up of
Continental crust and is separated by a general plane of decollement or separation along
weak strata. The geology in this corner of the Indian plate is very complex and a biaxial
state of stresses (Figure-5.6) in the crust has created sharp bends and closed arches of
faults called syntaxes.
The geotectonic of the whole region is therefore related to the collision of the Indian tectonic
plate with the Eurasian Plate and subsequent formation process of the Himalayan ranges.
This intercontinental collision has resulted in intense deformation with complex folding
involving strike-slip and thrust faulting and crustal thickening, expressed as a series of
thrust faults accompanied by a continental subduction process. This tectonic process is the
origin of the seismicity along the Himalayas and in particular where Northern Pakistan and
Kashmir are located. The major regional faults, related to the intercontinental collision,
include Main Karakorum Fault (MKF), Main Mantle Thrust (MMT), Punjal Thrust (PT), Main
Boundary Thrust (MBT), Main Frontal Thrust (MFT) and Salt Range Thrust. The Jabori
hydropower project site is located in the sub-Himalayas close to the Kashmir Thrust,
considered to be an extension of Main Frontal Thrust (MFT)/Himalayan Frontal Thrust
(HFT), which is active and a source of a large number of destructive earthquakes.
The above discussion indicates that the project site is located in an area where crustal
deformation is an active process due to presence of some major active faults in the region,
and it is, therefore, imperative to carry out seismic hazard evaluation for safe design of the
various project structures and equipment.
This report covers Seismic Hazard Evaluation for Jabori hydropower plant. The analysis is
based on available seismic data and literature regarding regional geology and tectonics. All
5-1
important faults of the Project areas have been taken into consideration. The Maximum
Credible Earthquake (MCE) is that earthquake which is based on an evaluation of the
maximum earthquake potential considering the regional and local geology and seismology
of the area, and is an event which might occur once in about 10,000 years. It is that
earthquake which produces the maximum vibratory ground motion against which the water
retaining structures and certain other vital components have to be designed. They may
undergo some displacements, but should continue to retain water, while several structural
components may suffer damages and be rendered non-operational. Maximum Credible
Earthquake (MCE) for each causative fault has to be determined by applying Deterministic
Seismic Hazard Analysis (DSHA) approach.
The operating Basis Earthquake (OBE), on the other hand, is an earthquake event which
could reasonably be expected to affect the dam site during the life of the structures. These
are the range of earthquake events which produce the vibratory ground motions for which
those features of the project that are necessary for its safety and continued operation are
designed to remain functional with some repairable damage. The selection of the
appropriate vibratory ground motions for such structure will be chosen based on judgment
of the acceptable risk for that structure. A value for the Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE)
for serviceability level safety has also been recommended. Tectonic and geological
information already available in scattered technical literature was gathered for the purposes
of this feasibility study.
In the present study, assessment has been made for the Maximum Credible Earthquake
(MCE) as safety level and the Operating Basis Design Earthquake (OBE) as serviceability
level for the Jabori Hydropower Plant in the North West Frontier Province of Pakistan. The
MCE and OBE together with the corresponding engineering parameters (i.e. peak ground
acceleration and design response spectra) needed for the design of the dam and related
structures, have been derived based on the recommendations of the ICOLD Bulletin 72
(1989) "Selecting Seismic Parameters for Large Dams. Under the MCE load some damage
to the dam is allowed, but an uncontrolled outflow of the reservoir must be avoided and all
safety related equipments have to remain functional. Under the OBE, no structural damage
such as tension cracks in concrete dams are allowed and all equipment has to remain
functional. In the hazard analysis, a number of parameters play an important role, so that
reasonable assumptions on the uncertainties have to be made. Therefore, all assumptions
are clearly presented in this feasibility report, and their consequences will be discussed. For
evaluating the Operating Basis Earthquakes the geological evidence, historical seismicity
and instrumental seismicity are discussed below:
5.2 Regional Tectonics
As also stated earlier, the tectonic setting of northern Pakistan is characterized by the
collision of Eurasian and Indian continental plates. The orogeny process started in the late
Eocene to Early Oligocene with the formation of the Himalayan Range. It is also understood
that a second collision immediately north of Pakistan took place in Paleozoic era. A regional
tectonic map of Pakistan as well as Northern areas is given in Figure-5.3 and 5.4.
Relative to Eurasia, the Indian plate is still moving northwards. The latest GPS
measurements indicate the North-Western Part of Sub-Continent i.e. mostly Pakistan is
5-2
moving 10 mm per year in north direction and 11 mm in westward direction. Indus suture
line that coincides with upper Tsengo river valley represents the original site of the
continental collision along which linear and well-developed ophiolites suites are found.
These ophiolites are interpreted as the remnants of the oceanic crust of the Tethys Ocean
trapped during the collision between the Indian and the Eurasian continental blocks. Major
portion of this convergence boundary involved folding and thrusting of the upper crustal
layers in the shape of MKF (Main Karakorum Fault), MMT (Main Mantle Thrust), MBT (Main
Boundary Thrust), MFT (Main Frontal Thrust) and SRT (Salt Range Thrust). A number of
associated thrusts and strike-slip faults were also developed in the collision zone between
MKF and SRT.
The MKF, now interpreted largely as a strike-slip fault as opposed to a thrust fault (based on
latest plate movement data) separates rocks of Eurasian landmass from Kohistan island arc
complex. The Kohistan Island Arc is separated from the Indian plate by MMT. The MBT
separates pre-collision Paleozoic and Mesozoic sedimentary rocks of the Indian plate from
the younger post-collision Himalayan molasses sediments. A single detachment surface,
called the Main Himalayan Thrust (MHT), is believed to exist beneath the entire rocks south
of MMT into which all Main Faults bottom out and merge. This surface extends southwards
till it emerges out in the shape of Salt Range Thrust .
In addition, the western Himalayas exhibit a peculiar structural pattern consisting of two
northward projecting loops or re-entrants, the Nanga Parbat-Harmosh Massif syntaxis and
the Hazara-Kashmir syntaxis. Around these syntaxes, the entire regional geological trends
take a sharp turn to make curved loops.
Northern parts of Pakistan and adjoining areas have their peculiar geological and seismic
conditions causing frequent occurrence of severe earthquakes. These areas have remained
under detailed study by several seismologists / geoscientists for delineating earthquake
generating fault system. Most of these areas are occupied by Himalayan Range, in which
the Kashmir and Northern Pakistan area lies. The strain accumulation in this area is
represented in Figure-5.6 and earthquake activity as shown in an overview map in Figure-
5.5, clearly demonstrates how the earthquakes concentrate along the plate margins. Even
when the details about the map (time period, sources, magnitude, type etc.) are not
available it shows clearly the regional earthquake distribution. Even though the Himalayan
region is huge and contains large parts that are remote and sparsely populated, still
professionals have some overview of the seismicity there for the last 500 years, even with
indications of an earthquake deficit at present. As a result of the continent-to-continent
collision in the Himalayas, the highest mountains in the world have been created, still being
uplifted more rapidly than any other mountain chain. The seismicity in northern Pakistan
occurs over a large crustal depth range. The maximum depth of the seismicity increases
gradually from 35 km deep in the area where the Precambrian rocks of the Indian shield
outcrop in the Punjab plains, to 70 km deep under the higher Himalayas. Available
information about the depth of the Moho in this area (Farah and others, 1977) indicates that
the maximum hypocentral depths roughly correspond to the lower boundary of the crust
(Seeber and Jacob, 1977). Major tectonic features relevant to producing an earthquake of
high magnitude, are described in the ensuing section.
5-3
5.3 Active Faults in the Region
5.3.1 Hazara Thrust Fault System
Seeber and Jacob 1977 suggest that the two major northwest-trending fault zones, the
Indus-Kohistan Seismic Zone (IKSZ) and the Hazara Lower Seismic Zone (HLSZ), well
defined by the deeper crustal seismicity, are discordant with the overlying arcuate structural
trends of the Hazara. These fault zones are interpreted as buried extensions of the north
westerly Himalayan frontal faults beyond their surface termination at the Western
Himalayan Syntaxis. Topographic steps aligned with the fault zones are prominent surface
expressions of these buried structures. Hazara fault is directly connected to the Hazara
Lower Seismic Zone (HLSZ), forming a northward dipping reverse fault continuous from
the surface to the lower crust. The Hazara Lower Seismic Zone is well defined below 20
Km, but it is sparse above this depth and the suggested relationship between seismicity and
surface geology is entirely speculative
5.3.2 Main Boundary Thrust (MBT)
In one of the interpretations, the MBT is considered as the sole thrust below the thick
sequence of inner-shelf sediments, originally resulting on the northern margin of India. It is
also one of the imbricate thrusts that contribute to the current shortening of the sedimentary
wedge.
Slip on the MBT may occur by earthquake ruptures. In analogy to the slip behavior of
imbricate thrusts within the accretionary wedges of oceanic subduction zones, the repeat
time for earthquake on the MBT is expected to be considerably longer than the repeat time
of great earthquakes on the underlying detachment.
5.3.3 Main Frontal Thrust (MFT) / Riasi Fault
Two independent pieces of evidence suggest that the 1905 Kangra rupture extends under
two distinct high intensity zones. Before the 1905 main shock, at least seven separate
foreshocks were felt (Middlemiss, 1910) within 24 hours. Five of these were felt only locally
so that the location assigned according to the felt reports are probably not that inaccurate.
Thus, the 1905 foreshocks are distributed along a portion of the Himalayan Front, which
may have intensity >8 on Rossi-Forel (RF) scale of intensities. The 1905 event is generally
believed to have ruptured the detachment along some 300 Km of the Himalayan front. This
event is characterized by low intensities (RF VII to VIII) above most of the rupture. These
low intensities may be due to low liquefaction potential in the plains and to low landslides
potential in the mountains.
5.3.4 Kashmir Thrust (KT)
Kashmir Thrust (KT) has been assigned to the active fault connecting Muzaffarabad with
Balakot. Reference is made of a Report on Seismic Microzonation of Balakot and
surrounding Areas, published in March 2006 by the Center of Excellence in Geology,
University of Peshawar in collaboration with ICIMOD (Nepal), ITC (Netherlands), ADPC
(Thailand) and Associated Institute of United Nation University (Japan). Recent studies
have proved that Kashmir Fault is traceable upto 4 Km north of Balakot city and it has its
5-4
extension upto Banna Allai area. It may also be considered an extension of the Main Frontal
Thrust (MFT).
The most recent major earthquake in the area occurred on 08 October, 2005, whose
epicenter was near Ghori (34o2935 N and 73o3744) about 19 Km NE of Muzaffarabad.
The minimum moment magnitude (MW) of the earthquake measured by the United States
Geological Survey (USGS) was 7.6 and the hypocenter was located at a depth of 26 Km
below the ground surface.
The earthquake caused severe destruction in large area of northern Pakistan Figure-5.7
and to a lesser degree in northern Afghanistan and northern India. The area that suffered
most serious damage was Azad Kashmir, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province (KP) of Pakistan,
and south-west part of the Kashmir valley in the Indian controlled Kashmir. The province of
Punjab of Pakistan was also affected by the earthquake to some extent. As many as 73,000
people lost their lives besides colossal damage to buildings and infrastructure.
The available evidence of ground rupture suggests that earthquake was caused most
probably by movement along the Kashmir Thrust. The surface rupture is continuous over a
distance of 75 km and cuts across the Hazara syntaxis reactivating the Tanda and the
Muzaffarabad faults. North of Muzaffarabad the surface rupture coincides approximately
with the MBT, on the southwestern flank of the syntaxis, although the two faults have
opposite dip angles. The rupture terminates abruptly at the hairpin turn of the MBT showing
a strong structural control. The fault offset is 4 m on average and peaks to 7 m northwest of
Muzaffarabad. The rupture lasted about 25 s and propagated updip and bi-laterally by
2 km/s, with a rise time of 25 s. The shallowness and compactness of the rupture, both
in time and space, provide an explanation for the intensity of destructions. The study sheds
some light on seismic hazard in the Himalaya, and raises concern regarding the possibility
of a repetition of the 1555 AD event which presumably ruptured the Himalayan front south
of the Kashmir basin and may have reached a magnitude M w > 8.( Jean-Philippe Avouac, et
al, 2006).
5.3.5 The Main Mantle Thrust (MMT)
According to interpretation of the structure of the Kohistan Himalaya the Kohistan

sequence (30,000 km2 of amphibolites, metagabbros and associated volcanics) may be the
crust of an ancient calc-alkaline island arc. During the suturing of India and Asia, this
oceanic rock sequence was obducted onto the Paleozoic cover of the Indian shield over a
large overthrust (Main Mantle Thrust or MMT). The deformation during this event was
chiefly crustal simple shear as attested by the flatly dipping foliation and the north-south
elongation lineation in the rocks. High pressure metamorphism also affected the deformed
rocks at places along the MMT. Late folds, such as the large Nanga-Parbat anticline, make
the present geometry more complex. The Kohistan sequence is overthrust to the south
onto a folded and metamorphosed series (presumably of Paleozoic age), which belong to
the northern margin of the Indian shield (Lower Swat or Buner schistose group). The
contact between the two units is clearly tectonic every where, and not intrusive. The contact
can be clearly seen south of Patan, in the Indus Valley, where it is marked by mylonites
(pyroxene fragments in serpentinite matrix). The overthrust can be traced westward through
5-5
Shangla Pass, across the Swat Valley near Khwazakhela (20 km NNE of Saidu) and the
Dire Valley of Zullam. It is also the basal contact of the Dargai Preidotite Klippe
(Malakand).This major contact, which over a vast area separates lower crustal or upper
mantle (mafic and ultramafic) rocks from the sialic crust of the Indian Shield, can be referred
to as the Main Mantle Thrust or MMT, a term which emphasizes both its characteristics
and its similarity to the other two major overthrusts of the Himalayan belt further east the
Main Central Thrust (MCT) and the Main Boundary Thrust (MBT). Rocks typical of high
pressure metamorphism are locally associated with MMT. At Shangla Pass, a large outcrop
of glaucophane blueschists marks the contact between the basic complex and the Buner
schistose group. To the North, another major contact separates the Kohistan sequence
from the sialic metamorphic rocks of the Hindu-Kush and Karakoram ranges.
5.4 Seismic Hazard Evaluation
All evaluations are based on the historical and instrumental recorded seismicity in the area,
documented in various catalogues. The time span that is reliably covered by these
catalogues is from 1937 to 2008. Before 1937, there are no earthquake records in the
database used for this project. To assess the seismicity of the area, the following five
catalogues have been evaluated:
PMD, Pakistan Meteorological Department, historical database.
PDE, United State Geological Survey, database.
Wapda Tarbela Mangla seismic network
ISC, International Seismological Centre England, database.
Other International and National Databases
5.4.1 Non-Instrumental (Historical) Data & Computation
Non-Instrumental/ historical data is based solely on human observations and is referred to

as intensity or felt data. Such information is invaluable for assigning seismic risk to a zone.
Intensity data becomes particularly valuable when it can be related to instrumental data.
The correlation of cause and effect where possible provides a very reasonable
interpretation of a seismic event.
Even though damage to structures is a function of ground acceleration, the amplitude of the
ground motion and the length of time that the ground vibration lasts, yet attempts have been
made to convert qualitative non-instrumental intensity data into quantitative acceleration
terms. From the descriptive records of historical earthquake data, the damages recorded at
different areas have been assigned intensity values on Modified Mercalli Scale (MMS)
ranging from I to XII corresponding to accelerations rising from 0.005g to 2.0g.
It is estimated that occurrence of intensity VIII to IX has a high probability of at least once in
the lifetime of any hydropower structure situated in Northern areas of Pakistan. There are
different empirical relationships correlating I with a. The acceleration value can be
5-6
obtained corresponding to different intensities by the Empirical relationships developed by

Neumann, Gutenberg & Richter, Hershberger etc. These relationships are given below:
Log a = 0.308 (I-1) + 0.267 (Neumann)
Log a = I/3-1/2 (Gutenberger & Richter)
Log a = 3/7 (I) -9/10 (Hershberger)
where Log = Log to the base 10
a = Acceleration in cm/sec2(1.0g = 980 cm/sec2)
I = M. M. Intensity.
For various intensity values, the acceleration relationships are shown in Table-5.1. For the
purpose of analysis, an average of the three acceleration values for each of the estimated
intensities VIII & IX for Jabori Hydropower Plant in North West Frontier Province of Pakistan
are also shown in that Table.
The average value of accelerations as computed above thus ranges from 0.26 to 0.6 for
intensity VIII & IX respectively.
5.4.2 Instrumental Data & Computations
As stated earlier that data from international as well as national institutes was obtained and
sorted out to eliminate the multiple entries of events. The data has been evaluated with
respect to reliability and completeness. For the period after 1964, it can be assumed that
the ISC catalogue is complete at least in respect of large events, and that the epicenter
locations are reliable, since the ISC data are based on the processing and analyzing of a
maximum of station data. In contrast, it was seen that in other catalogues, large events
could fall into the investigated region because of uncertain epicenter location. After 2004,
only USGS and PMD data are available, so that these databases were selected as
representative for the most recent years. There are two international accepted approaches
for events having missing data in terms of magnitude and depth. Some researchers
substitute a standard Mw value of 2.8, and depth of 8 kms for such events. Whereas some
use the relationship:
Ms= 7.15-0.0446 X (year-1900) year <1963
The homogenization of magnitudes was made and converted all the body wave magnitudes
(Mb) to Surface wave magnitudes (Ms) using the following relationship:
If Ms (USGS) definition is given, adopted it as Magnitude Ms
Else if an alternate Ms Value is available, accepted it as Ms
If only Mb value is given, converted them using:
Adopted Ms = 1.8 X Mb -5.2 (if the year is <1963)
5-7
else Adopted Ms = 1.8 Mb X -4.3
0.8M L -0.6Ms=1.04
In this region, the instrument recording is available from 1937, and available information as
to the time, location and the magnitude of all recorded earthquakes around this project area,
is collected. Figure-5.10 shows the spatial distribution of the epicenters of all earthquakes
occurring within 50 kms in the area. Keeping Jabori HPP site at the centre, earthquakes
occurring within 5 kms from this site have also been collected and presented in the Figure-
5.8. Figure-5.9 shows all the earthquakes falling within 50 kms of Jabori prior to Kashmir
Earthquake of October 2005.
5.5 Attenuation Relationship
Ground motion at the epicenter has been calculated using the following empirical formulae
developed by different scientists:
a = 6.6 x 10-2 x 100.4M x R-1.39g ORPHAL AND LAHOUD
a = 0.279 x e0.8M x R-1.64g DEVENPORT
a = 5.7 x e0.8M x (R + 40) -2g ESTEVA
a = 1080 x e0.5M x (R + 25) -1.32 cm/s2 DENOVAN
Where a = acceleration
M = Magnitude
R = depth to hypocenter
The values calculated for M = 6, 7 and 7.6 with hypocenter depth as 15 to 25 are calculated
as shown in Table-5.2. For earthquake of 7.6 magnitude at a focal depth of 25 Km
(equivalent to Kashmir earthquake of 2005), MCE value of 0.58 has been calculated.
The values of computed acceleration for 6, 7 and 7.6 magnitude range between 0.289g to
0.646g. Value for Magnitude 7.6 with focal depth of 25 Kms has significance, as 2005
Kashmir Earthquake can be correlated with this value. The focal depth of this earthquake is
20 kms as per Indian Geological Survey records, as per USGS records, it is 26 Kms, as per
Global CMT records, it is calculated to be 12 Kms and as per Japan (IISEE), its focal depth
is 30 kms. In this report a value of 25 Kms is adopted.
Strong motion records of the Kashmir earthquake of October 8, 2005 from the different
Pakistani stations were obtained and presented in Table-5.3. Tarbella and Brotha records
are from WAPDA Microseismic Network. Correlations with the available attenuation
relationship with the observed values have been attempted. It was found that the
relationship developed by Denovin fits well with the Wapda records. Devenport formula also
shows a good correlation, but for shorter epicentral distances, very high PGA resulted by
using this formula. Anyhow for other stations, there is a vide discrepancy. Another way is to
take a mean of all the calculated PGA values of different authors, and utilize it for
5-8
appropriate interpretation. The first approach is used for evaluation of PGA for Jabori HPP
site by applying Denovan formula for all the events occurring within 50 kms from the site.
5.6 Maximum Credible Earthquake
The Magnitude M of the Maximum Credible Earthquake (MCE) that can be associated with
the aforementioned tectonic features has been worked out. Bagh-Balakot (Kashmir) Fault
passes through Jabori area, hence parameters for rupture of Kashmir fault have been
utilized in evaluating the MCE. For earthquake of 7.6 magnitude at a focal depth of 25 kms
(equivalent to Kashmir earthquake of 2005), Maximum Credible Earthquake (MCE) value of
0.58g has been calculated (Table-5.2).
5.7 Operating Basis Earthquake
Jabori site located on Siran river in Mansehra District, KP, is hardly 42 kms from the major
Kashmir earthquake of 2005. Fifty Eight (58) earthquakes having magnitude ranging from
3.3 to 5.4 have occurred within 5 kms of this site (Figure-5.8) in quadrangle search. There
are 58 events in an area of approximately 100 sq. Kms around Jabori indicating a highly
active seismic area. It is inferred that the Kashmir Fault passes through this site. Jabori
HPP site appears to be coinciding with the epicenter of an earthquake with hypocenter at a
depth of 10 kms, and the site probably lies on the 75 kms long rupture caused by the
Kashmir Earthquake of 2005. From data it is inferred that maximum earthquake activity per
unit km is witnessed within 3 kms of Jabori site.
Data of 903 earthquake (Appendix 1) events within 50 kilometers quadrangle distance

around Jabori, collected from International and National agencies. USGS catalogue from
1973 to March 2009, has been explored. Map indicating the seismic events around Jabori
area has been prepared and presented in Figure-5.10. It is interesting to note that Jabori
area has about 90 seismic events before October 8, 2005 (Figure-5.9), out of which only 6
events have Ms greater than 5. The close examination of this map indicates the presence of
seismic activity to the Northwest of Jabori indicating active nature of the Kashmir Fault.
However situation changed dramatically after Kashmir Earthquake of 2005, and now we
have 903 Earthquakes in this catalogue with heavy cluster of seismic events around Jabori
(Figure-5.10). Evaluation of seismic events with respect to reliability and completeness has
been accomplished. An interesting feature of earthquake distribution in a circular search at
Jabori site from USGS database (starting 1973) is as shown in Table-5.4. Linear
Regression analysis of number of earthquakes events vs. distance from Jabori Figure-5.11
using the above data, gives the following equation, which indicates high seismic
vulnerability of the area:
N= 6.4079 D +114.22
Where N is the number of earthquakes and D is the distance from the Jabori hydropower
plant site. The epicentral as well as hypocentral distance of each Seismic event from Jabori
has been calculated, and after applying suitable PGA relationship, PGA value has been
determined. The maximum PGA value at this site comes out to 0.17g using Denovan
relationship. After applying the necessary safety factor to the observed PGA, The OBE is
calculated to be of the order of 0.22g
5-9
Peak Ground Acceleration at Jabori

Hydropower Plant Site 0.17
Operating Basis Earthquake value at
Jabori Hydropower Plant site. 0.22
The Hypocentre distribution (Figure-5.12) shows, that the area has very shallow
earthquakes with an average depth of 10 kms of seismic events. As per classification of
ICOLD, the PGA value at this site is Hazard Class II (Moderate).
Standard response spectra are based on a general characteristic shape that is defined in
terms of estimates of selected ground motion parameters, which can be effective peak
ground accelerations or spectral accelerations. The approach is to develop design response
spectra using peak ground motion parameters (peak ground acceleration, velocity and
displacement), multiplied by a series of appropriate spectral amplification factors that
depend on the damping level. Spectral acceleration is given as a function of moment
magnitude, distance to the rupture plane, fault type, soil conditions, and whether the site is
on the hanging wall:
lnPHA = f 1 (M, r rup ) + Ff 3 (M) + HWf 4 (M, r rup ) + Sf 5 (PGA rock )
where f 1 (M, r rup ) is the basic attenuation form for rock sites, and the other three terms are
modifications for fault type, hanging wall effects, and soil conditions, respectively.
Abrahamson & Silva (1997) equation has been utilized for the calculation of spectral
acceleration along with standard deviation, and is presented in Figure-5.13, for Operational
basis earthquake in Jabori area.. As is evident, maximum vertical spectral acceleration is
expected for waves having 0.1 second period.
5.8 Return Period.
A return period also known as a recurrence interval is an estimate of the interval of time
between an earthquake of a certain intensity or size. It is a statistical measurement denoting
the average recurrence interval over an extended period of time, and is usually required for
risk analysis (i.e. whether a project should be allowed to go forward in a zone of a certain
risk) and also to dimension structures so that they are capable of withstanding an event of a
certain return period (with its associated intensity). When dealing with a structure design
expectations the return period is useful in calculating the risk of the structure with respect to
a given earthquake return period when given the design life expectation.
There is the likelihood of at least one event that exceeds design limits during the expected
life of the structure: it is the complement of the likelihood that no events exceed design
limits.To get an approximate value of the return period, RP, given the exposure time, T, and
exceedance probability, r = 1 - non-exceedance probability, NEP, (expressed as a decimal,
rather than a percent).
RP = T / r* Where r* = r(1 + 0.5r).
r* is an approximation to the value -loge ( NEP ).
In the above case, where r = 0.10, r* = 0.105 which is approximately = -loge ( 0.90 ) =
0.10536 Thus, approximately, when r = 0.10, RP = T / 0.105
5 - 10
In Table-5.5, the exceedance probability is constant for different exposure times. ICOLD
recommendation is shown in bold letters and is approximately 475 years. Figure-5.14
shows the frequency of earthquakes versus magnitude of earthquakes around Jabori HPP
site utilizing the seismic events data presented in Annexure 1, and expressed as per
Gutenberg-Richter law.
Log N =6.6 -1.21 M
The b-value comes out to be of the order of -1.21. It is little bit lesser than -1 due to 2005
Kashmir earthquake and its after shocks. Similarly 6.6 value of a is determined from
Figure-5.14. This is the place where the frequency line intercepts with the magnitude axis.
The Return Period using the above Gutenberg-Richter Law for a Magnitude 7.6 earthquake
in this area is 394 years, whereas for a 7 magnitude earthquake it comes out to be of the
order of 74 years.
A fact should also be kept in mind that earthquakes have a certain frequency and a return
period. If the return period is, say Y years, then an earthquake of similar magnitude is likely
to occur after Y years anywhere along a fault line. The seismic gap perpetually floats on the
fault and wherever the situation is seismically suitable, a quake is triggered. Once an area
experiences a quake, its epicentral volume is crushed and it becomes unable to accept any
further geo-technical stress. This means that once an area has experienced an earthquake,
it will not experience another earthquake of a similar magnitude for a long time. The time
gap is usually about three to five times the return period of the earthquake. Usually the
return period of medium-sized earthquakes (of magnitude ranging from 6.0 to 7.0) is of the
order of a few decades. For powerful earthquakes (with magnitude higher than 7.0), the
return period is usually 100 years or more. Hence the possibility of occurrence of one
earthquake immediately after another at the same location or in its vicinity is almost nil.
5.9 Conclusions
The Jabori HPP site lies in a high seismically active zone which might experience
seismic hazard of significantly high magnitude.
The latest event of October 08, 2005 earthquake of Muzaffarabad-Balakot produced

an Intensity of around IX with a Magnitude of 7.6. Therefore, on the basis of felt
intensity data of recurring events, an intensity range of VIII to IX would be reasonable
for the region under study.
On the basis of felt intensity data and the instrumental record of macro and micro
seismicity, the faults of Main Boundary Thrust (MBT), Kashmir Thrust (KT) and Main
Mantle Thrust (MMT) are considered to be active in the Project areas.
With Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis (DSHA), value of 0.58g for Maximum
Credible Earthquake (MCE) has been calculated. The available 903 seismic events
around this site indicate OBE values of the range from 0.22 for Jabori HPP. As per
classification of ICOLD Bulletin 72 (1989) "Selecting Seismic Parameters for Large
Dams", the PGA value at Jabori site falls in Hazard Class II (Moderate).
5 - 11
The return period as per Gutenberg-Richter Law for a 7.6 magnitude earthquake is
calculated to be of the order of 400 years, and for a Magnitude 7 earthquake is 74
years for Jabori HPP site.
The values calculated in the previous paras are considered adequate for structures of
the relatively small Hydropower Projects (8 MW) involving diversion weirs and small
structures.
5 - 12
TABLES
Table-5.1
Intensity values and acceleration relationship
M.M. NEUMANN GUTENBERGER HERSHBERGER Average

Intensity & RICHTER
V 0.032 0.015 0.018 0.22

VI 0.065 0.032 0.048 0.048
VII 0.133 0.07 0.128 0.11
VIII 0.27 0.15 0.345 0.255
IX 0.549 0.32 0.925 0.598
Table-5.2
PGA values for Magnitude 6, 7 & 7.6
Earthquake with hypocenter depth as 15 & 25 kilometers
Earthquak Hypocentra Acceleration a

e l ORPHAL DEVEN ESTEV DENO- Average
Magnitude Depth PORT A VAN
(M) (Km)
6 15 0.376 0.391 0.224 .163 0.289
7 15 0.946 0.871 0.499 .269 0.646
7.6 25 0.825 0.622 0.590 0.276 0.578
8 25 1.192 0.856 0.812 0.337 0.799
Table- 5.3
Evaluation of PGA in Pakistan using different Formulae
Station Mag Dist. ORPHAL DEVEN- ESTEVA DENOVAN Observed

(Mw) (Kms) PORT PGA
Abbottabad 7.6 37 0.4783 0.3268 0.4201 0.2079 0.087
Murree 7.6 53 0.2903 0.1813 0.2880 0.1535 0.069
Nilor 7.6 82 0.1583 0.0886 0.1674 0.1011 0.023
Tarbela 7.6 80 0.1638 0.0923 0.1730 0.1037 0.1
Brotha 7.6 125 0.0881 0.0444 0.0915 0.0648 0.04
Table-5.4
Earthquake distribution using USGS database around Jabori
Distance
(kms)from 1 3 5 7 10 15 20 30 40 50 70 100 150 200
Jabori
No. of
Earthquake 2 21 42 78 138 249 362 509 592 658 763 856 1016 1193
Events
Table-5.5
ICOLD recommendations on return period
Rule of Thumb Exact

NEP T r r* Calculation RP RP
0.9 50 0 0.11 50/0.105 476 474.6
0.9 100 0 0.11 100/0.105 952 949.1
0.9 250 0 0.11 250/0.105 2381 2373
FIGURES
Fig 5.1 Location Map of Koto, Karora and Jabori HPP sites, NWFP. Pakistan.
Fig 5.2 Basin Architecture of Pakistan
Fig 5.3 The Indian Plate colliding with Eurasian Plate and Tectonic Map of Pakistan
(after Geological Survey of Pakistan)
Fig 5.4 Tectonic Map of Northern Pakistan
Figure 5.5: Northern Pakistan Earthquake of 2005 with Regional Seismicity and
Tectonic Elements of Pakistan (after USGS)
Fig 5.6 Regional Stress Map of East Asia
Figure 5.7: Intensity Map of Kashmir Earthquake 2005
(Courtesy http://asc-india.org/events/051008_pak.htm)
Fig 5.8 Epicenters of Earthquakes Around 5 kms of Jabori Hydropower Plant.
Rectangle Length=10 Kms Breadth=10 Kms

Fig 5.9 Spatial distribution of the epicenters of earthquakes around Jabori
Hydropower Plant, NWFP, Pakistan Prior to October 8, 2005.
Fig 5.10 Spatial distribution of the epicenters of all earthquakes around Jabori
Hydropower Plant, NWFP, Pakistan.
Rectangle Length= 100 Kms Breadth=100 Kms

Fig 5.11 Distance Vs Number of Earthquakes Graph at Jabori HPP.
1600
1400
N = 6.4079D + 114.22
1200
No of Earthquakes
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Distance From jabori(Kms)
Fig 5.12 Hypocenters Depth on a N-S Section through Jabori HPP site with a distance
of 50 Kms from the site
Fig 5.13 Spectral Acceleration Due to Operational Basis Earthquake at Jabori, NWFP
Vertical
10 Sa+
Sa
Sa-
1
Spectral Acceleration (g)
0.1
0.01
0.01 0.1 1 10
Period(Sec)
Fig 5.14 Number of Earthquakes and Respective Magnitude within 50 Kms of Jabori
Area.
Earthquake Frequncy-Magnitude Data around

Jabori
1000
100
Frequency
Log N = -1.21 m + 6.6
10
1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Magnitude
CHAPTER
6
PROJECT LAYOUT AND

HYDRAULIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
CHAPTER 6
PROJECT LAYOUT AND HYDRAULIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
6.1 Project Layout
6.1.1 General
Jabori Hydropower Project is located on Siran river which flows next to Kaghan Valley in the
East and crosses through rock sequences of Cambrain Mansehra Granite and Pre-Cambrain
Tanawal formation, consisting of medium to coarse grained metaquartzites. Downstream of
Shinkiari with altitudes below 1000 masl, there are flat wide areas. In the upper section of
Siran River the valley becomes narrow. Near village Jabori, Siran river is meandering with
comparatively steep slope. In the project area, the river takes a loop encompassing
approximately 7.60 Km of area. This project will connect the two limbs of the loop by means of
a weir, a tunnel and power house. A gross head of approximately 123 m is thus available for
power production because of the long loop and steep river slope.
6.1.2 Layout Studies
Jabori Hydropower Project proposed by GTZ comprised a low diversion weir across Siran
River near Jabori, a power tunnel and a power house with two generation units near Granthali.
Following were the salient features of the initial scheme.
Weir: With moveable gates, lateral intake, stilling basin, gravel spilling system and
sandtrap, intake gates, stoplogs, trashracks etc.
Width of weir 35 m (approx.)
Height of weir 6m (approx.)
Headrace: Concrete lined pressure tunnel
D=4m
Total length L = appr. 1200 m (during low flow periods, Acts as a storage
tunnel)
Surge shaft
Valve chamber
Delivery system
Penstock D = 1.30 m, L = 250 m (approx.)
Distribution system
6-1
Powerhouse:
High pressure valves
2 turbine-generator units with a total of 8 MW capacity
Governors
Transformers
Electrical equipment
Switchyard
Cranes
Tailrace: Concrete structure with gates and stoplogs
Present Layout Study:
In the present layout, the concept is the same as proposed by GTZ, however some changes
were found necessary in the light of latest available topographic, hydrologic and other data.
Main deviation has been made in the weir height, tunnel diameter and tunnel gradient.
The proposed scheme comprises 15 m high diversion weir with lateral intake, a conveyance
channel (cut-and-cover conduit) leading the diverted water to sand trap from where the coarse
sand-free water enters into the power tunnel. Inlet portal of the power tunnel has been located
in sound rock. Other components of the scheme are then selected in a manner to provide most
economical and technically the most viable layout.
For economic reasons, storage for peak demand hours has been provided behind the higher
weir instead of storing it in the power tunnel as was proposed by GTZ. The weir height
proposed by GTZ (6 meters) was found impractical as it did not ensure adequate drowning of
the tunnel inlet. Tunnel diameter of 4 m proposed by GTZ became redundant because the idea
of using the tunnel for peak storage has been dropped. The tunnel diameter is reduced to
2.0m, according to the technical and economical considerations.
Gentle slope of the hill on the powerhouse side favours a pressure tunnel with steep slope
terminating at the powerhouse. This is in lieu of a conventional gently sloping tunnel
terminating at the surge tank from where penstocks lead the discharge to the turbine in the
powerhouse. However both cases have been studied as option 1 & option 2.
Location of powerhouse has also been studied at two different places, one upstream of the
existing bridge at Garanthali and the other downstream of it. These locations have been
studied as two alternatives; Alternatives A & B.
Other details of the proposed / selected layout are described in the subsequent paragraphs of
this section.
6-2
6.1.2.1 Weir Alternatives
After studying several alternative sites finally the following two sites shown in Figure-6.1 for the
weir were selected.
a) The site for weir axis-1 is located about 1.00 Km upstream of village Jabori.
b) Weir axis-2 is located about 100 m upstream of weir axis-1.
Following are the advantages and disadvantages of the two alternatives:
Weir Axis 1
Advantages:
Weir crest length (82 m) is shorter than weir axis-2.
Geotechnical investigations are indicative of good quality rock present for left side
abutment.
Length of cut-and-cover conduit is smaller as compared with weir axis-2.
The extent and quantity of upstream blankets are much lesser as compared with
weir axis-2.
Lesser cost as compared with weir axis-2.
Disadvantages:
Good quality rock is not present for right abutment and some extra treatment will be
required for the overburden lying on the right abutment.
Weir Axis 2
Advantages:
There is good quality rock for both left and right abutments.
No extra treatment will be required on abutments.
Disadvantages:
Weir crest length (144 m) is longer than that of weir axis-1.
More quantity of upstream blankets will be required as compared with weir axis-1.
193 m of additional length of cut-and-cover conduit.
Special treatment will be required for cut and cover conduit as it passes through
major land sliding area.
More cost as compared with weir axis-1.
6-3
The cost comparison between the two weir axes are given below:
It can thus be concluded that weir axis-1 is more attractive.
6.1.2.2 Optimization of Design Discharge
An optimization study for design discharge has been carried out through Reservoir Operation
Studies with total turbine discharges ranging from Q 10 to Q 40 . Annual energy has been
computed for each case. Benefits and costs are then computed and the resulting Net Present
Value (NPV) has been calculated. As a result of these studies design discharge has been
selected as Q 30 = 6.28 m3/sec. Details are given in Table-6.1 and Figure below:
6-4
6.1.2.3 Power Tunnel Alternatives
Final alignment of tunnel has been kept on the right side of the Siran River as was also
proposed by GTZ. Main reasons are as follows:
- Topographic conditions are better i.e. the bank slopes along which the tunnel has to
pass are generally uniform.
- A rock stratum is generally favourable.
- A truckable road is available leading to the existing main road to Jabori village. It
provides easy approach conditions for the transport of materials and equipment during
construction.
- Minor slides towards Siran River and erosion of soft beds of shale and siltstone will not
have an effect on the power tunnel.
Since two alternative locations for the powerhouse have been considered there are two
alternative alignments for the power tunnel, which have been studied (Figures-6.1 and 6.2).
Furthermore, two options regarding gradient of power tunnel were considered as shown in
Figures-6.1 (A) & 6.2 (A) as described below:
a) Tunnel having mild slope with surge chamber and surface penstock.
b) Tunnel having 1 in 12.5, slope which is directly connected to small penstock along with
arrangement of pressure relief valve.
Further details are discussed later under the respective headings of each layout alternative.
Optimization of Power Tunnel Diameter:
The next step is to select an optimum diameter of power tunnel through a comparative study.
The detailed working of power tunnel equivalent diameter, tunnel cost and cost of energy loss
are presented in the Table shown below:
Tunnel Optimum Area Calculation
Diameter (m) 1.50 1.60 1.70 1.80 1.90 2.00 2.10 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00
Area (m2) 1.77 2.01 2.27 2.54 2.84 3.14 3.46 3.98 4.91 5.94 7.07
Total Friction
9.42 6.69 4.86 3.57 2.66 2.04 1.57 1.08 0.62 0.37 0.23
Losses (m)
Tunnel Cost
per year (M. 0.99 1.06 1.13 1.20 1.27 1.34 1.42 1.54 1.74 1.95 2.17
Rs.)
Cost of
Energy
0.80 0.57 0.42 0.30 0.23 0.18 0.13 0.09 0.05 0.03 0.02
Loss per year
(M. Rs.)
Total Cost
1.79 1.63 1.55 1.50 1.50 1.52 1.55 1.63 1.79 1.98 2.19
(M. Rs.)
6-5
These costs are graphically presented in the Figure as below:
Selection of tunnel diameter is based on the following considerations:
- Geological & Geotechnical studies do not suggest larger diameter tunnel in the rock.
- In order to carry the required discharges, minimum 1.8 m dia tunnel is required.
- Although the optimization studies indicate that 1.85 m dia for the tunnel is most
economical but from practical considerations related to construction, inspection and
maintenance the equivalent diameter cannot be less than 2.1 m clear.
6.1.3 Layout Alternative A (Downstream of Existing Bridge)
Option - 1:
The project layout Alternative-A (option-1) for Jabori Hydropower Project consists of weir,
intake, cut-and-cover conduit, sand trap, power tunnel with mild slope, surge chamber,
penstock, power house and tailrace channel. For details see Figures 6.2 and 6.2(A).
Salient features of the proposed Alternative-A (Option-1) are given below:
i) Width of Siran River at weir site = 35 m
ii) Length of weir crest = 82 m
iii) Length of conduit (130+135) = 265 m
iv) Length of sand trap = 65 m
6-6
v) Length of power tunnel = 1033 m
vi) Height of surge chamber = 30 m
vii) Length of penstock = 538 m
viii) Length of tailrace channel = 52 m
Following are the advantages and disadvantages of Option-1:
Advantages:
Power tunnel length is smaller as compared with Option 2.
No need of pressure relief valve as surge chamber will be provided.
Disadvantages:
Penstock length is much longer as compared with option 2.
Much higher head loss as compared with option 2.
More environmental issues as compared with option 2.
More cost as compared with option 2.
Option - 2:
The project layout Alternative-A (Option-2) for Jabori Hydropower Project consists of weir,
intake, cut and cover conduit, sand trap, power tunnel with 1 in 12.50 slope, pressure relief
valve (since suitable economical location for surge tank is not available due to the topographic
features hence pressure relief valve is provided), penstock, powerhouse and tailrace channel.
For details see Figures 6.2 and 6.2(A).
Salient features of the proposed layout Alternative-A (Option-2) are given below:
vi) Height of surge chamber = no chamber required.
6-7
Following are the advantages and disadvantages of Option-2:
Advantages:
Penstock length is smaller as compared with option 1.
No need of surge chamber as pressure relief valve is provided.
Lesser environmental issues as compared with option 1.
Lesser cost as compared with option 1.
Disadvantages:
Power tunnel length is longer as compared with option 1.
Priming will be required before starting turbine units.
6.1.4 Layout Alternative B (Upstream of Existing Bridge)
Option - 1:
The project layout alternative-B (option-1)for Jabori Hydropower Project consists of Weir,
intake, cut and cover conduit, sand trap, power tunnel with mild slope, surge chamber,
penstock, power house and tailrace channel. For details see figure 6.3 and 6.3(A).
Salient features of the Layout alternative-B (Option-1) are given below:
vi) Height of surge chamber = 30 m
Following are advantages and disadvantages of Option-1:
Advantages:
Power tunnel length is smaller as compared with option 2.
No need of pressure relief valve as surge chamber will be provided.
6-8
Disadvantages:
Penstock length is much longer as compared with option 2.
More excavation will be involved for power house as compared with alternative-A.
More environmental issues as compared with option 2.
More cost as compared with option 2.
Option - 2:
The project layout alternative-B (option-2) for Jabori Hydropower Project consists of Weir,
intake, cut and cover conduit, sand trap, power tunnel with 1 in 12.50 slope, pressure relief
valve , penstock, powerhouse and tailrace channel. For details see figure 6.3 and 6.3(A).
Salient features of the Layout alternative-B, (Option-2) are given below:
vi) Height of surge chamber = no chamber.
Following are advantages and disadvantages of Option-2:
Advantages:
Penstock length is smaller as compared with option 1.
No need of surge chamber as pressure relief valve will be provided.
Lesser environmental issues as compared with option 1.
Disadvantages:
Power tunnel length is longer as compared with option 1.
Priming will be required before starting turbine units.
More excavation will be involved for power house as compared with alternative-A.
6-9
6.1.5 Cost Comparison of Alternative A and Alternative B
A summary of cost estimates for both alternatives is given below:
Alternative-A Alternative-B
Item Option-1 Option -2 Option-1 Option -2
Description
No. Pak. Rs. Pak. Rs. Pak. Rs. Pak. Rs.
(Million) (Million) (Million) (Million)
1. Preliminary Works 43.40 43.40 43.40 43.40
2. Environment & Resettlement Costs 69.94 69.94 69.94 69.94
3. Civil Works
Diversion 3.36 3.36 3.36 3.36
Main Dam/Weir 129.69 129.69 129.69 129.69
Bottom Outlets 8.40 8.40 8.40 8.40
Power Conduits 11.08 11.08 11.08 11.08
Power Tunnel 249.44 278.06 254.69 285.88
Sand Trap 13.60 13.60 13.60 13.60
Surge Chamber 69.56 - 69.56 -
Power House 81.92 81.92 85.87 85.87
Tailrace Channel 2.67 2.67 2.50 2.50
4. Electrical and Mechanical Works
Hydraulic Steel Structures 3.82 3.82 3.82 3.82
Hydro-Mechanical Equipment 302.86 308.46 302.86 308.46
Powerhouse Mechanical Equipment 54.19 54.19 54.19 54.19
Powerhouse Electrical Equipment 37.20 37.20 37.20 37.20
Transmission Line 51.00 51.00 51.00 51.00
Transportation and Erection Charges 22.45 22.75 22.45 22.75
Sub Total-1 1,154.58 1,119.52 1,163.61 1131.12

Detail Design and Tender Documents @
23.09 22.39 23.27 22.62
2%
Client Expenses, Administration and
34.64 33.59 34.91 33.93
Legal Costs @ 3%
Engineering and Supervision Costs @
46.18 44.78 46.54 45.25
4%
Sub Total-2 1,258.49 1,220.28 1,268.33 1,232.94
Contingencies @ 5% 62.92 61.01 63.42 61.65
Total Base Cost ( Million Pak. Rs. ) 1,321.41 1,281.29 1,331.75 1,294.59
Total Base Cost (US $ = Rs. 86) 15.37 14.90 15.49 15.05
Total Capacity (MW) 6.11 6.50 5.90 6.29
Total Cost per MW 2.52 2.29 2.63 2.39
Annual Energy 42.75 46.00 41.01 44.26
6.1.6 Conclusion
On the basis of above considerations it was initially recommended that alternative A (Option
2) will be the selected layout for the draft feasibility study. However SHYDO and Asian
Development Bank (ADB) are not so confident on the use of pressure relief valves and prefer
the conventional layout with surge shaft instead of pressure relief valves option. Therefore, and
also because cost differential is not substantial alternative A (Option 1) has been finalized.
6 - 10
6.1.7 Description of Selected Layout Components
The project layout for Jabori Hydropower Project can be divided into the following three main
components:
- Weir site area
- Power tunnel area
- Powerhouse site area
The proposed (selected) layout plan of Jabori hydropower project is shown on Figure-6.4.
6.1.7.1 Weir Site Area
The weir site area will comprise the following civil work components:
- Access Road
- Weir
- Outlets & undersluices
- Lateral Intake
- Sandtrap
- Power Conduits
Overall access is easy by existing main road coming from Mansehra. A truckable access road
will be constructed to connect the existing road on left side of river and weir site. Weir has
been located at the shortest possible width of the river, which is at about 1.00 Km upstream of
village Jabori. A 13.00 m high weir across 82.00 m river width will be provided. Weir shape is
Ogee type with free overflow section. Weir will be combined with lateral intake concrete
structure followed by cut-and-cover conduit (130.00 m long) along right bank of river which will
lead to sandtrap. Sandtrap (65.10 m x 9.00 m) is so located that its flushing conduit leads the
discharge back to the river. The sand trap will be followed again by cut-and-cover conduit
(135.00 m long) till start of the power tunnel. Weir consists of three undersluices (1.50 m x 2.00
m) and four bottom outlets (3.00 m x 3.00 m). The outlets will be operated by stoplogs and
bulkhead gates.
6.1.7.2 Power Tunnel Area
The second component of the layout will be 1060 m long tunnel through the hill till it opens up
near the powerhouse. This area will comprise the following underground civil work
components:
- Power Tunnel.
- Surge Shaft.
6 - 11
- Penstock.
The power tunnel passes through hills with specially constructed terraces for agriculture
purposes along the river. The outcropping rock gives good tunneling conditions for
construction. The tunnel will be concrete lined having a clear diameter of 2.0 m. The tunnel
enters the rock about 350.00 m away from the intake structure in the river Siran, where the
tunnel inlet portal is located in sufficiently high hill. As stated earlier, the total length of the
tunnel is 1060 m and it slopes down at a gentle slope of 1 in 1000. The tunnel while traversing
through the hill is perfectly straight with no bends. When the tunnel daylights near the
powerhouse, it will be connected to surge shaft. From surge shaft a surface steel penstock of
1618 mm plate thickness with a diameter 1.50 m will carry the flow till it enters the spiral
casing of turbine inside power house. The total length of penstock is 511 m.
6.1.7.3 Powerhouse Site Area
Powerhouse site area will comprise the following open civil work components:
- Access Road
- New Bridge
- Powerhouse
- Tailrace Channel
An access road will be constructed to connect the existing road on left side of river and
powerhouse site. The existing bridge is made out of wooden logs which have only nominal
strength. A new 74 m long bridge across the river for heavy machinery will have to be
constructed, 52 m downstream of the existing bridge.
Powerhouse site is located near village Garanthali. The powerhouse is located on right bank of
river Siran in a plain area about 90 m downstream of existing bridge. This area is covered by
approximately 7 m deep alluvium, and underneath good and competent rock is available for
foundation of the powerhouse. The dimensions of powerhouse are 43.00 m x 18.00 m x 25.50
m (L x W x H).
Turbines will discharge through draft tube into the tailrace and back into the river. For tailrace,
a concrete structure with gates and stoplogs is proposed along with an open channel.
6.2 Hydraulic Design Considerations
6.2.1 General
The hydraulic design studies for Civil Works of Jabori Hydropower Project, include design of
weir, intake, sandtrap, power tunnel, penstock, powerhouse and tailrace. Hydrological studies
show that minimum and maximum mean monthly discharges of Siran River are 2.71 and 11.26
cumecs respectively. The mean monthly discharge is 5.80 cumecs. The power intake and
other facilities will be designed for a rated discharge of 6.28 cumecs for which two Francis
turbines are provided to produce 6.5 MW of total power during the peak demand period. As
intake will take lesser discharges during the lean period in the river, two turbines of 3.24 MW
6 - 12
have been proposed. These can be run according to the availability of water while the inflow
will be controlled at the intake structure.
The following components form part of the Jabori Hydraulic Design:
Main weir comprising the over flow section and the stilling basin
Four bottom outlets of size (3.00 m x 3.00 m) and three under sluices of size (1.50 m x
2.00 m)
Intake structure including cut and cover conduit
Sandtrap
Cut and cover pressure conduit
Power tunnel
Surge Shaft
Penstock
Tailrace channel
Diversion Arrangements
Hydraulic design considerations for the above components are given in the following
paragraphs.
6.2.2 Main Weir
The main weir is located at the narrowest section of Siran River in that reach while the
upstream portion is a wide braided river. The advantage of this location will be that it will
provide a reservoir of such a capacity which will be sufficient to provide discharge for power
production for the peak demand over 4 hours. The reservoir capacity takes care of the likely
reduction due to the existing land slide as well as likely land slides in the future. Survey of the
reservoir has been carried out and Area - Capacity - Elevation curves prepared which are
shown as Figure-6.6. Four hours back up storage requires 90,432 m3 volumes above El.
1381.00 m. The dead storage capacity below El. 1377.00 m is 11,805 m3 which will provide
space for future sediment deposition. The full reservoir level (FRL) for weir is at El. 1383.00 m.
When there will be flood in the river, the surcharge will build up to El. 1384.50 m, which will
pass through the ungated ogee weir with 4 Nos. bays of 10.00 m width. Layout plan of weir &
power intake is shown on Figure-6.7.
The top of the weir is at El. 1387.60 m and 4.00 m wide roadway on the crest and a bridge
over the 4 bays of spillway has been provided. At the location of the weir the river bed is at El.
1374.00 m which will be further excavated down to El. 1371.8 m. At the excavated bed
elevation, that is, El. 1371.80 m the foundation of weir would be placed. Thus the total height
of the weir will be 15.80 m. With these parameters, upstream weir elevation is shown on
Figure-6.8, while the overflow section is shown on Figure-6.9. At the upstream side, grout
6 - 13
curtain has been provided to cut off seepage path in the alluvium below the weir foundation to
reduce uplift pressure on the stilling basin foundation slab. After the ogee crest a proper chute
has been provided with slope of 1:1. The ogee weir, undersluices and bottom outlets are
designed to pass a flood of 970 cumecs which is higher than 1000 years return period flood
and it has been checked for floods of the following return periods;
Return Period Flood

(Years) (cumecs)
2 45
5 160
10 255
25 374
50 492
100 600
500 858
1000 970
10000 1093
Out of the three structures, the weir alone will pass 146.00 cumecs at reservoir El. 1384.50 m.
The ogee weir geometry at the crest has been designed for 146.00 cumecs discharge. The
detail of this is shown on Figure-6.9 as Detail-A. As already explained the main weir is divided
in four parts each 10.00 m long and separated from each other by 1.00 m thick piers, which will
also be supporting the deck of overhead bridge. The perpendicular height of the chute walls
are 2.00 m and its width is 1.00 m and it meets the side walls at El. 1379.00 m on both sides of
the weir. The downstream view of the weir showing all of the above components are shown on
Figure-6.10. The variation of discharge capacity of spillway at different reservoir elevations has
been described in the graph and Table as follows:
Total No. of Bays = 4 No
6 - 14
Width of each Bay = 10 m

Total No. of Bottom outlets = 4
Size of each Bottom outlet = 3m x 3m
Total No. of undersluices = 3
Size of each undersluice = 1.5 m x 2m
C for outlets = 0.88
Invert level of outlets /
undersluices = 1377 m
Discharge Rating Curve
Total Discharge (Q) passing through

Elevation He He/Ho C/Co C Le Bottom Under
Spillway Total
Outlets sluices
(m) (m) (m) (m3/sec) (m3/sec) (m3/sec) (m3/sec)
1383.0 0.00 0.00 0.80 1.748 40.00 0.00 297.67 78.44 376.12
1383.2 0.20 0.07 0.81 1.770 40.00 6.33 304.22 80.00 390.55
1383.4 0.40 0.14 0.84 1.831 39.95 18.50 310.62 81.52 410.65
1383.6 0.60 0.21 0.86 1.872 39.90 34.72 316.90 83.02 434.63
1383.8 0.80 0.29 0.88 1.923 39.84 54.81 323.05 84.49 462.35
1384.0 1.00 0.36 0.89 1.944 39.79 77.37 329.09 85.93 492.40
1384.2 1.20 0.43 0.91 1.988 39.74 103.86 335.02 87.35 526.23
1384.4 1.40 0.50 0.92 2.010 39.69 132.14 340.85 88.75 561.74
1384.5 1.50 0.54 0.92 2.010 39.64 146.36 343.72 89.44 579.52
1384.6 1.60 0.57 0.93 2.041 39.64 163.69 346.58 90.13 600.39
1384.8 1.80 0.64 0.95 2.076 39.58 198.41 352.21 91.48 642.10
1385.0 2.00 0.71 0.96 2.093 39.53 234.03 357.76 92.82 684.60
1385.2 2.20 0.79 0.97 2.124 39.48 273.58 363.22 94.13 730.93
1385.4 2.40 0.86 0.98 2.141 39.43 313.87 368.60 95.43 777.91
1385.6 2.60 0.93 0.99 2.172 39.38 358.49 373.91 96.71 829.11
1385.8 2.80 1.00 1.00 2.185 39.32 402.53 379.14 97.98 879.64
1386.0 3.00 1.07 1.01 2.207 39.27 450.29 384.30 99.22 933.81
1386.2 3.20 1.14 1.02 2.218 39.22 497.85 389.39 100.46 987.70
1386.4 3.40 1.21 1.02 2.224 39.17 546.14 394.41 101.68 1042.22
1386.6 3.70 1.32 1.02 2.228 39.12 620.38 401.83 103.47 1125.69
The stilling basin consists of two parts of which the first part is the main weir and undersluices
and the second part which will be smaller in size is the bottom outlets. The main stilling basin
6 - 15
will cater for flows from the ogee weir and jets of water falling from under sluices. The depth of
flow at the toe of weir will be 0.91 m. The jump formation will take place and conjugate depth
(d 2 ) 5.76 m will be obtained after the jump. The invert elevation of the stilling basin is at El.
1372.80 m and length of basin will be 23.00 m followed by an end sill of 2.00 m height. At the
bed level of the river after the end sill 1.00 m thick riprap will be provided. A cutoff will be
provided upto El. 1371.00 m. The stilling basin slab thickness is 1.00 m and it will be sufficient
for the uplift pressure generated by seepage through alluvium. Side walls on both sides of
main stilling basin will be provided with a free board of 0.90 m above the conjugate depth (d 2 )
after the jump. Sections through non overflow portion with bottom outlet and without bottom
outlet are shown as Figure-6.11 and 6.12.
6.2.3 Free Board
Free Board has been provided on all dams to ensure that overtopping of dam will not result
from wind setup, wave action, and uncertainties in analytical procedures and in operation in
combination with high reservoir elevations. Freeboard is categorized into normal freeboard
and minimum freeboard. Normal freeboard is the allowance between the crest of the dam
and normal reservoir level as fixed by design. The normal freeboard should satisfy the dam
safety needs for long term storage and must be adequate to prevent overtopping in case of
abnormal and severe wind action of even low probability that may result from unusual
sustained winds of high velocity from a critical direction. Minimum freeboard is the difference in
elevation between the crest of the dam and the maximum flood level for un-gated spillway.
The calculations for freeboard are given in the following Table:
FREEBOARD CALCULATIONS
River Bed Level FRL = 1374.0 m 4508.1 ft
Full reservoir level / crest of spillway FRL = 1383.0 m 4537.6 ft
Maximum flood level MFL = 1384.5 m 4542.5 ft
i. Wind Setup, S
Wind velocity V = 161 km/hr 100 miles/hr
Fetch F = 0.650 km 0.404 miles
Mean reservoir depth along the fetch D = 9.00 m 29.53 ft
Wind setup S = 0.03 m 0.098 ft
Wave height by Molitor - Stevenson formula Hs = 0.85 m 2.80 ft
ii. Wave run up R = 0.85 m 2.80 ft
iii. Extra allowance E = 0.05 m 0.16 ft
Freeboard = S + R + E
Calculated Freeboard FB = 0.93 m 3.06 ft
The above said computed freeboard has also been checked for the flood of 10,000 years
return period and it is found that this freeboard is sufficient for the passing of flood of 10,000
years return period.
6 - 16
6.2.4 Bottom Outlets
Four bottom outlets (3.00 m x 3.00 m) have been provided in the weir and they are located in
the middle of each 10.00 m long bay. These will be closed and opened from the top of the
bridge deck with bulkhead gates which run in proper guides. For passing max floods these will
work in conjunction with main ogee weir. All bottom outlets will pass a discharge of 344
cumecs under maximum flood level (MFL i.e. at El. 1384.50 m). At the inlet short rounded bell-
mouth will be provided to streamline the flow into the conduit to avoid cavitation damage. At
the outlet a proper jet will form and drop in the pool of water in the main stilling basin. The
details of bottom outlets are shown on Figure-6.13. The impact of the jet will be borne first by
pool of water and then by concrete slab of the stilling basin. Preferably, these will be opened
when the main weir flows are being discharged. These outlets will keep the upstream bed clear
of the sediments and rock pieces. Sediment flushing from the reservoir will take place during
the flood season, when reservoir level is drawn down.
6.2.5 Under sluices
Three under sluices 1.50 m x 2.00 m have been provided in the right abutment of the weir
away from the main bays and a separate small stilling basin has been provided for energy
dissipation. Their function is sediment flushing in front of intake structure. In addition, these will
also work in conjunction with main weir and under sluices to pass the flood discharge of 90
cumecs at maximum flood level (El. 1384.50 m). At the inlet of under sluices a short curved
bell mouth will be provided to avoid cavitation. The closing and opening arrangement will be
controlled with bulkhead gates in proper grooves from the top of the bridge deck. At the exit of
under sluices a jet will form that drops in the separate stilling basin provided for these under
sluices.
The energy dissipation of the jet of water impinging upon the stilling basin floor will take place
when it hits the pool of water and then the concrete floor of the stilling basin. The stilling basin
is so provided that the jet will not strike beyond the end sill. The stilling basin floor slab will be
1m thick and length of the stilling basin will be 13.00 m while the end sill will be 2.00 m high. In
this case also a stone apron 1m thick and 6m long has been provided at the river bed level. A
cutoff of 2.00 m has been provided as a part of end sill. The detail of under sluices and stilling
basin are shown on Figure-6.14.
6.2.6 Intake Structure
The power tunnel on the upstream side will be joined by, sandtrap, connecting conduits and
intake structure. The intake structure off takes from the right bank of River Siran few meters
upstream of the weir at right angle to the main weir and the under sluices, so that flushing of
the river bed in front of intake structure will be efficient. The connecting conduit is 2.4 m x 1.5
m which off-takes from the intake structure and its inlet will be 3.90 m wide and 2.50 m high.
These are connected with smooth transitions on the sides as well as on the top as shown in
Figure-6.15. At the inlet the intake structure will be provided with a trashrack and stoplogs
arrangements which will slide in proper grooves provided in the reinforced concrete abutments.
These will be lowered from top of the platform built for this purpose at El. 1385.00 m. The
invert of the intake will be at El. 1378.00 m which is 1m above the invert of under sluices. The
trashrack will prevent entry of wooden logs, stones and other undesirable matter. The stoplogs
6 - 17
will be placed for convenience of inspection and repair whenever required. The bulkhead gate
will be used to regulate flow in the intake.
The abutment will be 1.80 m thick; whereas its length on both sides of the intake will be 3.00
m. This will have two grooves one for trashrack and other for stoplogs and bluk head gate as
shown on Figure-6.15.
The connecting conduit will have finished dimension of 2.40 m x 1.50 m with 0.30 m thick
reinforced concrete lining. Inner surface of the conduit will be trovel finished to provide smooth
surface to reduce head loss. The connecting conduit will extend 130.00 m before joining the
sandtrap. The connecting conduit will have one bend of radius 10.00 m. An automated gate
with sensors will be provided at the end of the conduit to control the discharge in the sandtrap.
6.2.7 Sandtrap
The sandtraps invert, where it joins the connecting conduit will be at El. 1377.94 m where an
automatic gate will be provided. Beyond this, there will be transition on the sides as well as on
the bed. The side transitions on both sides flare at an angle of 13o, and it continues till the
width between the two transition walls will be 7.80 m. The transition length will be 11.75 m. In
the same length the bed will slope downward upto El. 1374.82 m and the sides and bed will
attain full width and depth. All details related to sandtrap are shown on Figure-6.16
From there onwards, the sand trap will be divided into two chambers separated by a 0.60 m
thick reinforced concrete divide wall which extends upto the top of the sandtrap. As the
sandtrap will have sloping bed along the flow therefore the height of divide wall varies between
4.92 m and 6.87 m. The bottom of each chamber will be sloping inwards where there will be a
deep channel so that the settled particles of the sediments will be collecting in the deep
channel and flushing will be easier. The two chambers will be flushed together. The flushing
channel 1.0 m wide for each chamber will be provided at the end of the deep channel with
proper flushing gate of 2.0 m x 0.70 m size.
The outer walls of the flushing chambers are of reinforced concrete 0.6 m thick. The flow depth
in the sandtrap will vary from 4.43 m to 6.38 m. This depth of flow has been calculated on the
basis of fall velocity of sediment particles of 0.20 mm. The fall velocity of particle size of 0.20
mm is 0.0134 m/sec in flowing water and the length of sandtrap has been provided on the
basis that a particle of 0.20 mm falls to the bottom till the end of chambers. No doubt this will
trap all the particles larger than 0.20 mm size along the length of the chambers.
In case of malfunction of the automatic gate or development of surge in the power tunnel a spill
section in the side of sandtrap has been provided. This will be on the side facing the river so
that the flows can drop into the river channel. The spill section size will be 0.25 m high and
10.00 m long.
6.2.8 Headrace Power Tunnel
Power tunnel will offtake from the downstream of 135 m long cut-and-cover conduit which itself
offtakes from downstream of the sandtrap. The invert of cut and cover conduit will be at El.
1372.87 m. The inlet will be semi bell-mouth and a trashrack will be provided at the inlet. The
size of the trashrack will be 3.50 m x 2.70 m. The power tunnel will be horseshoe in section
6 - 18
and its internal finished equivalent diameter will be 2.10 m. The tunnel will be lined with 0.35 m
thick reinforced concrete which will be trovel finished to reduce losses. The total length of the
power tunnel will be 1060.00 m. The detail of power tunnel, trashrack and intake are shown on
Figure-6.17 and the longitudinal section is shown on Figure-6.5. The submergence for the
power tunnel has been checked and it has been found adequate. The velocity in the tunnel will
be 1.81 m/sec and through the trashrack it will be 0.71 m/sec. As the power tunnel will be
concrete lined therefore the Mannings n value used for calculation of head loss is 0.014.
The rated discharge for will be 6.28 cumecs when both the units at full capacity will be working.
The velocity in the power tunnel will, of course, depend on the discharge passing through the
tunnel.
6.2.9 Surge Shaft
Surge shaft has been provided at the end of concrete lined tunnel with 3.0 m internal diameter.
A steel lined penstock commences downstream of the surge shaft with an internal diameter of
1.5 m. In accordance with standard design practice and the hydraulic design criteria, the cross-
sectional area of the cylindrical surge shaft is selected with a factor of safety of 3.0 times larger
than Thoma Criterion to ensure adequate stability of plant operation. Based on the
characteristics of the upstream waterways and the design water levels, the minimum surge
shaft dimensions were determined as shown in following Table:
Minimum Cross Section for Surge Shaft

Total headrace discharge Q = 6.28 Cumecs
Length of headrace tunnel L = 1060 m
Diameter of Tunnel D = 2.0 m
Cross sectional area A = 3.14 m2
Head Losses H = 3.67 m
Velocity in Tunnel V= = 1.81 m/sec
Minimum operating level M.O.L = 1378.25 m
Minimum tailwater level = 1256.20 m
Gross head Ho = 125.00 m
Net head Hn = 119.00 m
Minimum X-sectional area of surge shaft As = 2.1 m2
3.0 As = 6.3 m2
Required Diameter Dreq = 2.00 m
Selected Diameter Ds = 3.00 m
Maximum up surge Zmax = 13.19 m
Height Provided H = 15.00 m
Free Board FB = 1.81 m
6.2.10 Penstock
At the end of the power tunnel there will be a steel penstock 16 -18 mm thick. Penstock will
lead to a turbine with a length of 511 m and diameter 1.5 m then it bifurcates to dia 0.76 m and
finishes at the spiral case level of the turbine. The maximum velocity in penstock will be 3.55
m/sec. The penstock is to withstand full thrust of water and to prevent seepage leading to
6 - 19
powerhouse which will be detrimental to the components of the powerhouse. The Mannings n
value used for calculation of head loss is 0.011.
6.2.11 Tailrace Channel
Rectangular tailrace channel will be provided downstream of the powerhouse. The draft tubes
will open in the tailrace channel which will join the river with proper transition on the sides as
well as on the bed. Practically, there will be no loss of head in the tailrace because the velocity
will be low and it will be turbulence free. Sufficient submergence will be provided to the
turbines for their efficient running. The tailrace for rated discharge of 6.28 m3/sec will be 2.5 m
wide with 1.5 m deep. The velocity in the tailrace will be 1.75 m/sec while value used for
Mannings n is 0.014.
6.2.12 Tailwater Rating Curves
Tail water calculations at the site of the weir and the powerhouse have been carried out by
means of HEC-RAS computer program and to facilitate calculation and correctness of results,
5 nos. river sections have been used at weir site and 5 nos. sections of the river have been
used at powerhouse site. For tail water rating curve at weir site the section has been taken 20
m downstream of the weir axis. The river bed consists of sand, alluvium and boulders and river
is meandering therefore Mannings n value has been selected as 0.035. The rating curves
downstream of weir and at the location of powerhouse are shown as Figure-6.18 & 6.19
respectively.
6.2.13 Diversion Arrangement
It is visualized that the construction of main weir and intake structure on the river Siran will take
two dry periods and one flood season in the 32-months construction period. The main weir will
be constructed into two parts. In first year, right side of the main weir including intake structure,
one bottom outlet and three under sluices will be constructed by separating the rest of the river
by means of cofferdams and a river channel. The diversion discharge will be equivalent to 10-
years return period which is 182.00 cumecs. The diversion channel will be 15.00 m wide at
bottom and flow depth in the channel will be 2.00 m. The cofferdam will have a crest level of El.
1377.00 m having a freeboard of 0.53 m. Its water side will be stone pitched and crest width
will be at least 5.00 m to allow traffic on top for maintenance purposes and to carry the
construction material for the right side of main weir.
The right side of the main weir will be completed in the first year which will include flood period
of 5 months. Once the main weir portion is completed and flows reduce to dry period level,
then the cofferdam to cutoff the river channel will be constructed and the main weir portion in
the river channel will be completed before the on set of next flood season. During the dry
season in which the main weir in the diversion channel will be constructed, the river flows will
pass through the under sluices and bottom outlet already constructed. It may be added that the
stilling basin downstream of under sluices and bottom outlet will be ready in the first year of
construction.
The arrangement of cofferdam in two seasons of construction is shown on Figure-6.20 & 6.21.
6 - 20
6.2.14 Head losses in Power System
Actual head losses are estimated as follows:
Design discharge for powerhouse = 6.28 cumecs
1. Trashrack = 0.10 m
2. Entrance = 0.01 m
3. Bends (1 @ 111o) = 0.10 m
4. Power Conduit Friction (L avg ~ 135 m) = 0.27 m
5. Power Tunnel Friction (L avg ~ 1060 m) = 1.61 m
6. Penstock Friction (L = 511 m) ( = 1.5 m) = 3.78 m
7. Transitions = 0.07 m
8. Gate and Valve = 0.06 m
Sum of all losses;
1 to 8 = 6.0 m
Note: For Hydraulic design calculations refer Volume-III (Annexures)
6 - 21
TABLES
Table 6.1
JABORI HYDROPOWER PRPJECT
Optimization of Design Discharge
Turbine Discharge Max. Capacity Total Energy Economic Analysis

Discharge Installed Annual Cost /
Cost
(Q) Capacity Theoret- Plant Benefit KWh Disco. Disco.
Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 1 Unit 2 Total Actual B/C NPV
ical Factor Cost Benefit
(m3/sec) (m3/sec) (m3/sec) (MW) (MW) (MW) (MW) (GWH) (GWH) (M Rs.) (M Rs.) (Rs.) (M Rs.) (M Rs.) (M Rs.) (M Rs.)
Q10 8.2 4.10 4.10 4.27 4.27 8.54 8.54 49.25 74.81 65.83 1680.67 295.500 34.13 1399.85 1883.73 1.346 483.877
Q15 7.6 3.80 3.80 3.96 3.96 7.92 7.92 48.86 69.38 70.42 1558.66 293.160 31.90 1298.22 1845.68 1.422 547.456
Q20 7.09 3.55 3.55 3.69 3.69 7.38 7.38 47.94 64.65 74.15 1452.38 287.640 30.30 1209.71 1794.56 1.483 584.850
Q25 6.64 3.32 3.32 3.46 3.46 6.92 6.92 46.84 60.62 77.27 1361.86 281.040 29.07 1134.31 1741.21 1.535 606.904
Q30 6.28 3.14 3.14 3.27 3.27 6.54 6.54 45.77 57.29 79.89 1287.07 274.620 28.12 1072.02 1692.14 1.578 620.124
Q35 5.94 2.97 2.97 3.09 3.09 6.18 6.18 44.57 54.14 82.33 1241.56 267.420 27.86 1034.11 1639.88 1.586 605.772
Q40 5.66 2.83 2.83 2.95 2.95 5.90 5.90 43.42 51.68 84.01 1209.50 260.520 27.86 1007.41 1592.53 1.581 585.118
FIGURES
FIGURE - 6.6
Area (sq. meter)
110,000 100,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0
1390 1390
1388 1388
1386 1386
1384 1384
Elevation (m)
Elevation (m)
1382 1382
1380 1380
1378 1378
1376 1376
Area-Capacity-Elevation Curves
1374 1374
0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 700,000 800,000
Capacity (cubic meter) Capacity Area
FIGURE 6.18
JaboriHydropowerProject
TailwaterRatingCurveatWeirSite
1379
1378
1377
Elevation(m)
1376
1375
1374
1373
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
Discharge(Cumecs)
FIGURE 6.19
JaboriHydropowerProject
TailwaterRatingCurveatPowerhouseSite
1257
1256
1255
Elevation(m)
1254
1253
1252
1251
1250
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
Discharge(Cumecs)
CHAPTER
7
STRUCTURAL DESIGN STUDIES

CHAPTER 7
STRUCTURAL DESIGN STUDIES
7.1 Contents
Contents of this chapter are based on project features shown in Figure-6.4 Project
Selected Layout Plan, and other figures showing details of individual structures and / or
components provided and discussed in Chapter-6 Project Layout and Hydraulic Design
Considerations.
7.2 Salient Structures and Components
Detailed description of the structures for the project layout is provided hereinafter. Salient
components of the Weir Axis 1 Layout listed in Chapter-6 Project Layout and Hydraulic
Design Considerations, are repeated here as preamble to the subsequent discussion
addressing (a) Functional requirements of different structures, (b) Design considerations
involved in establishing the initial sizing, (c) Structures design parameters and / or criteria;
(d) Live, seismic and other design loads and governing load conditions, (e) Design
approach and methodology; etc. Various structures and components are listed below.
S-No Structure / Description Figure No.

1 Weir Structure at Axis 1, Intake, Bottom Outlets and 6.6 to 6.14
Sluiceways, Stilling Basin inclusive
2 Power Intake and Connecting Conduit 6.16
3 Sand Trap Structure, 6.15
4 Conveyance Conduit 7.1
5 Tunnel Portal, Power Tunnel 7.2
6 Steel Liner, Steel Penstock and Manifold Block -
7 Powerhouse 7.3
8 Switchyard -
9 Residences: Planning, Construction, Allied Facilities -
7.3 Structures Design References
Various references used for the design of the project structures at the Feasibility Design
Stage, are listed below. Each reference is assigned a number in box bracket e.g. [3], [4] etc.
Where necessary in the text, a particular reference is mentioned by this number in box
bracket, without mentioning the complete title or the name of the author / compiling agency.
[1] ACI 318-95 Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete
[2] ACI 350R-89 Environmental Engineering Structures
[3] ACI 207.2 Effect of Restraint, Volume Change and Reinforcement on Cracking of
Massive Concrete Structures
7-1
[11] USBR Engineering Monograph No 14 Beggs Deformeter Stress Analyses of

Single Barrel Conduits
[12] US Army Corps of Engineers EM 1110-2-2901, Tunnels and Shaft in Rock
[13] American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) Steel Penstock and Tunnel Liners
[21] Raynolds C E RC Designers Handbook
[22] Nilson A H Design of Concrete Structures
7.4 Structures General Design Criteria
Barring the superstructure portion of the powerhouse and residences, the project structures
fall in the category of hydraulic structures. General design criteria requirements and method
of design of hydraulic structures is detailed hereafter. Discussion provided here is limited to
the design requirements and considerations of general applicability. Any particular design
requirement or considerations for a specific structure, if applicable, is discussed under the
design of that structure.
7.4.1 Strength and Durability Requirements
7.4.1.1 Concrete Strength
The project may or may not be executed under Engineering Procure and Construct (EPC)
contract. Concrete strength requirement is established for use in structures design, for
estimating the unit costs of concrete of given strength, and for drafting detailed material
specifications for construction.
7.4.1.2 Minimum Cement Contents
Specified concrete strength is based on provisions of ref [1] and ref [2]. The project is
located in seismic zone and minimum specified (cylinder) strength of concrete for structures
needs to be 20MPa (C20) in conformance with provisions of ref [1]. Due to considerable
hydro-static pressure, concrete of strength 28MPa (C28) shall be used in power tunnel and
preferably also in the weir and stilling basin. Consideration to minimum cement content in
concrete of specified maximum size of aggregate (MSA) is also necessary for durability in
compliance to provision of ref [2]. Depending on MSA, the minimum specified cement
content for structural durability of non-massive structures e.g. tunnel lining, varies from
310kg/m3 to about 350kg/m3. Actual strength of the concrete mix with minimum cementitious
material contents maintained in conformance with provision of ref [2], often exceeds the
specified strength of C20.
7.4.1.3 Reinforcement
The design shall be based on grade 425 (grade 60) reinforcement bars conforming to
ASTM A 615 or an equivalent standard, with yield strength = 425MPa, for use as main or
distribution reinforcement in general structures, except Y10 (#3), and Y12 (#4) bars used as
column ties, beam stirrups, or dowels (between the First Stage and Second stage
Concrete), which may be plain round grade 250 (mild steel) bars, with fy = 250MPa (36ksi).
7-2
7.4.2 Unit Weight of Materials
For calculating the imposed load and / or pressures on a structure or component of the
structures, the unit weight of principal material in KN/m3 is listed below:
Water (Dry) Earth Rock Concrete Structural Steel

9.81 18 to 20 25 to 27 24 78
7.4.3 Dead Loads
Dead load shall comprise of the self weight of structure component, permanent finishes and
fixtures. In view of the fact that finishes and permanent fixtures are not generally provided in
hydraulic structures, finishes are generally limited to some components of Powerhouse,
Control Room and the Switch Yard Control Room.
7.4.4 Live Loads on Categories of Structures (kN/m2)
Live load comprises of loads and / or forces which can vary in magnitude in the service life
of the structure, and include (I) Imposed loads, (II) Hydrostatic loads, (III) Gate loads,
(IV) Wind loads etc.
On Powerhouse Loading Bay or Erection Bay Floors = Weight of the heaviest

equipment in the assembled form, 40kN/m2, or as specified by the manufacturer.
On Powerhouse Storage Areas = 20kN/m2 / specified by the manufacturer
On Powerhouse Roof in the event of gust / high wind = 2 kN/m2
On Floor of Office Buildings = 5 to 6 kN/m2
On Roof of Office Buildings = 4 kN/m2
7.4.5 Earth Pressure
Calculation of Earth Pressure shall be based on Mononobe-Okabe or other classical

methods. Earth pressure co-efficient in the case of massive structures considered
immovable, shall be considered for At Rest condition.
When the construction or other traffic can come within a horizontal distance from the top of
the structure equal to one half of the height of retained earth behind the structure, uniform
surcharge to be considered on the full height of structure shall be equivalent to 0.60m (2ft)
of additional fill.
7.4.6 Categories of Loads, Load Factors, Allowable Increase in Stresses
7.4.6.1 Categories of Loads
Normal or Category 1 Loads: Include normal persistent loads (Dead and imposed,
Live loads including equipment load and operational Impact, Hydrostatic and Earth
pressure including surcharge and Uplift pressure),
7-3
Exceptional or Category 2 Loads: Include Construction loads, Gust, Operational

dynamic loads, Operational Basis Earthquake (OBE) and Design Flood loading etc.
Extreme or Category 3 Loads: Include Maximum Credible Earthquake (MCE) load,

Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) load, etc.
7.4.6.2 Design Load Factors
Other than Power Tunnel
Design loads are increased by the following load factors for all structures other than the
power tunnel, wherein the design is based on ultimate strength design (USD) method.
- For Dead Loads (D) including the members self weight, permanent finishes and
fixtures = 1.40
- For Live Loads (L) as specified by the general building code or the plant
manufacturer = 1.70
- For hydrostatic and (retained) earth pressures (H) = 1.70
- Wind loads (W) = 1.70
- For temperature effects (T) = 1.40
- Seismic Loads (E) = 1.875
- Allowance for impact (vibration) applied to rotating machinery e.g. Turbine; and / or
moving load suspended (lifted) by mechanical component e.g. Gantry Crane; i.e.
Impact Factor (I) = 0.10 to 0.30*(L) added over and above the (live) loads. Design
factor applied to (I) = 1.70.
For Power Tunnel
Load Factors for power tunnel shall be based on Table-9-1 Design Cases and
Recommended Load Factors for Power Tunnel, of ref [12], reproduced below:
Design Cases & Recommended Load Factors for Power Tunnel1
Load Case 1 2 3
2
Dead load 1.3 1.1 1.1
3
Rock Load 1.4 1.2 1.4
Hydrostatic operational4 1.4 - -
5
Hydrostatic transient - 1.1 -
Hydrostatic external6 - - 1.4
Live load - - -
7-4
Notes:
1
This table applies to reinforced concrete linings
2
Self weight of the lining,
3
Rock loads are the loads and / or distortions derived from the rock-structure interaction
assessments
4
Maximum internal water pressure, minus the minimum external water pressure, under
normal operating conditions,
5
Maximum transient internal water pressure, for example, due to water hammer, minus the
minimum external water pressure,
6
Maximum ground water pressure, acting on an empty tunnel.
The effects of net internal hydrostatic loads on the concrete lining may be reduced by
considering interaction between lining and the surrounding rock.
7.4.6.3 Allowable Increase in Stresses
Normal Loading: When only category 1 loads are acting on the structure, the load
combination is termed as normal, no increase in allowable stress is permitted in the
design, and the factor for design strength (say FD = 1.0).
Exceptional Loading: When category 2 loads combine with category 1 loads, the
load combination is termed as exceptional. Increase of 25 percent in the allowable
stresses is permitted by ref [1] in this case. Alternatively, a factor = 0.80 is applied to
factored design forces (BM, shear etc) to cater for the increase in allowable
stresses. Refer load combinations.
Extreme Loading: When category 3 loads combine with category 1 loads or two
category 2 loads combine, the load combination is termed as extreme. 33 percent
increase in the allowable stresses is permitted by ref [1]. Alternatively factor = 0.75 is
applied to the factored design forces and moments, to cater for the allowable
increase. Refer load combinations.
7.4.7 Required Strength (U) other than Power Tunnel
Structures shall be proportioned for minimum required strength equal to or in excess of that
required by the following load combinations:
U = 1.4D + 1.7L
U = 1.4D + 1.7L + 1.7(I)
U = 1.4D + 1.7L + 1.7(I) + 1.7H
U = 0.80(1.4D + 1.7L + 1.7(I) +1.7W)
7-5
U = 0.80(1.4D + 1.7L + 1.7(I) + 1.875OBE)
U = 0.75(1.4D + 1.7L + 1.7(I) + 1.875MCE)
In the design of structures PMF loads shall not be combined with seismic or wind forces,
neither the gust forces combined with seismic forces. In the design of hydraulic structures,
hydraulic factor shall be applied over and above the listed load factors in specified case e.g.
F(h)*[1.4D + 1.7L + 1.7(I) + 1.875H], wherein F(h) = hydraulic factor, detailed later in this
section.
7.4.8 Required Strength for Power Tunnel
Required strength for power tunnel shall be worked out similarly, using the load factors for
power tunnel.
7.4.9 Strength Reduction Factors
To allow for the probability of under strength due to variation in material strength and
member dimensions etc, design strength of a member in flexure, axial loads, shear, etc,
shall be taken as the nominal strength calculated in accordance with the requirements of ref
[1], multiplied by strength reduction factor (fi), considered according to provisions of ref [1],
and listed below:
Force Reduction Factor

Flexure without axial loads 0.90
Axial tension, and axial tension with flexure 0.90
Axial compression, and axial compression
0.70
(Except for members with spiral reinforcement)
Shear and Torsion 0.85
Bearing on concrete 0.70
7.4.10 Method of Design
ACI ultimate strength design (USD) method shall be used in general for the design of
structures. For hydraulic structures, hydraulic factor is applied to the loads over and above
the load factors used in the load above combinations. ACI Alternate Design Method is not
used for the design of hydraulic structures to avoid application of hydraulic factor to design
forces, using allowable stresses in concrete and reinforcement. This is considered overly
conservative approach.
7.4.11 Load Combinations
General Load combinations are listed above. Any specific combination, if required, in a
particular component shall be considered on case to case basis.
7.4.12 Uplift Forces
For the stability analyses, uplift considered under the (weir) structure is based on the
pressure values for anisotropic conditions, contained in note Seepage Control Measures in
7-6
figure Uplift Pressure Vs Distance; values varying (a) Maximum from 66 to 84kN/m2 (at
upstream / Distance 0m), (b) Minimum from 44 to 55kN/m2 (at downstream / Distance
33m). Force is considered effective over 100 percent of area subject to uplift.
7.4.13 Size of Structures
Size of structures and components is established in consideration of their hydraulics,

construction, functional and operational requirements. Effects of the dead and imposed
(live) loads, impact, probable contact of the structure with water, watertight-ness under
hydrostatic head, uplift forces, buoyancy effect, structural (movement) joint location; are
considered keeping in view the structures durability and serviceability. In view of the
considerable hydrostatic head, the design of powerhouse unit bays minimum ratio of the
mass of stationary sub-structure to the mass of revolving machinery, shall be 5 to 10,
according to the provisions contained in standard references.
7.4.14 Design Earthquake Factors
Factor for pseudo-static stability analyses in the OBE and MCE conditions is taken from
Chapter-5 Seismic Hazards. Seismic Factor considered in the stability analyses is adopted
after modification made in the Value at Site given in the report, considering (a)
Damping of ground motions, (b) Structures ductility, and (c) Incoherence of earthquake
vibrations in the structures whole base width and along the height, and surrounding water
mass (in water retaining structures) (d) The possibility of occurrence of the earthquake
immediately after another at the same location or in its vicinity is almost nil.
7.4.14.1 Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE)
Operating Basis Earthquake represents a level of ground motions which, all structures and
equipment should withstand while remaining functional. Damage, if any, should be non-
structural and easily repairable. It implies that the stresses should not increase by more
than about 20 percent compared to the normal operation condition.
7.4.14.2 Maximum Credible Earthquake (MCE)
Principal structural components should withstand that level of motions without uncontrolled
release of reservoir water. However, occurrence of significant structural or non-structural
damage could be acceptable under MCE. It also implies that the stresses in reinforcement
shall not exceed the yield point.
7.4.15 Design Response Spectrum
The Response Spectrum used for dynamic analyses of structures shall be based on Tabas
(Iran) Earthquake of 1980, as also used on Ghazi Barotha Project, or other accepted
spectrum used elsewhere.
7.4.16 Factors of Safety (FOS) for Stability Analyses
After establishing the basic size of structures subject to lateral dynamic (seismic) forces,
their (pseudo-static) stability is ensured in the seismic conditions. This stability shall be
7-7
checked in at least the OBE condition. The following (minimum) FOS shall apply in checking
the pseudo-static stability of structures in respective conditions:
Load Case FOS Sliding Eccentricity (e) Fndn Pressure
Normal 1.50 B/6 P(allowable)
Exceptional 1.25 B/4 (4/3)*P(allow)
Extreme 1.1 to 1.05 Within the Base To be decided
Note: Friction Factor of Safety in Sliding = [w * tan Sliding Force]
7.4.17 Factors of Safety (FOS) in Flotation
Minimum FOS in flotation shall be as given below:
Condition Normal Exceptional Extreme
FOS 1.25 1.15 1.05
7.4.18 Factor of Safety (FOS) in for Allowable Pressure on Foundation
The FOS used in deciding the allowable (bearing) pressure on foundation rock shall be
based on the allowable pressures on submerged rocks. This aspect is detailed in Chapter-3
Geology, Geotechnical Engineering and Construction Materials.
7.4.19 Hydraulic Factor for Design of Reinforcement
The project structures generally fall in the category of hydraulic structures i.e. structures
remaining in contact with backfill soil or water in the in-service condition. Hydraulic Factor
as recommended in ref [2], will be applied to design (factored) forces acting on all structures
in contact with water, as follows
- Bending Moment = 1.30
- Shear Force = 1.30 limited to shear to be taken by reinforcement
- Direct Tension = 1.65 tension tie and similar components
7.4.20 Impact of Moving Vehicles on Structures
Impact effect (I) on the main girders of bridge due to moving traffic shall be based on the
criteria I = 50/(L+125), wherein L = Design span in ft. Maximum value of impact I shall be:
10 percent, for Military Loading,
10 percent of the crane capacity due to movement of Gantry Crane,
30 percent for vehicles with tires like trailers and trucks,
7-8
7.4.21 Buoyancy
Buoyancy effects corresponding to the loss of weight of submerged portion of the

structure, is considered in submerged structures. However, in Jabori HPP, truly submerged
structure is apparently not encountered. Only substructure of powerhouse exposed to tail-
water is partly submerged during high flood.
7.4.22 Hydrodynamic Forces on Structures
Seismic Inertial and hydrodynamic forces act on the structures in the event of earthquake.
Hydrodynamic force act in addition to hydrostatic force on structures retaining water
pressure, like the Main Weir, (inner and outer) walls of Sand Trap, etc. Calculation of hydro-
dynamic forces is based on the Westergaard method, as detailed in the Harza Design
Guide No DG-16 Hydrodynamic Forces on Structures.
7.4.23 Wind Loads
Wind pressure shall be applied to the exposed surfaces of the components, in accordance
with the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) stipulations, detailed in ANSI Code
1995. Wind velocity = 160km/hr (100mph), acting horizontally at height = 10m, shall be
considered in design. Importance factor for the powerhouse to be taken = 1.25. Except any
exposed part of the conveyance conduit and powerhouse superstructure, wind force does
not appear in the design of structures.
7.4.24 Pour Length of Concrete and Spacing of Construction Joints
To minimize the shrinkage cracks in structures, horizontal length of concrete pours (spacing
of vertical construction joints) in project structures, shall generally be limited to the following.
Depending on the ambient temperature, time lapse for concrete pouring in adjacent panels,
shall be staggered by about 7 to 10 days.
Spacing of Vertical Construction Joints in Structures (m)
End Restraint Conditions Structurally Restrained Un-Restrained
Spacing of Vertical Joints (m) 10 to 12 14 to 16
7.4.25 Water-stops
7.4.25.1 Types and Material
In general water-stops shall be provided in all vertical construction, contraction and

expansion joints in water retaining structures, and foundations subject to uplift pressure.
Water-stops used shall be (a) Without bulb (straight or dumbbell) type I in construction
joints, (b) With central bulb (type II) in contraction and expansion joints. The bulb shape
depends on (I) The magnitude of movement at the joint, and. (II) Hydrostatic pressure at
joint location; (c) Type T with central bulb, placed on blinding concrete layer. Material of
water-stop may be either synthetic, like rubber, Hypalon, or PVC; or metallic (e.g. copper).
7-9
Copper water-stops are more resilient, and can better accommodate probable movements
at joints. Criteria for selection of the width of water-stop, is discussed later.
7.4.25.2 Water Stop in Joints in Powerhouse
Water-stop is provided in construction joints in powerhouse substructure and superstructure

where water level can rise to the level of construction joint(s). Due to the probability of tail
water level rising to about El 1260, water-stop shall be provided in all contraction and
expansion joints, and construction joints in superstructure downstream of powerhouse.
7.4.25.3 Location
Water-stop may be provided:
In the middle of member thickness, in thin members
At about 200-400mm (8 to 16 inch) from the water face, in thick (minimum 600 or 24
inch) members.
7.4.25.4 Two Rows of Water Stop
Where the hydrostatic pressure is high, or probability of differential settlement between

adjacent members at the movement joint in member retaining water under high head exists,
two rows of water-stops at 400 to 900mm (16 to 36 inches) distance from the water face are
used in massive components, e.g. joints in powerhouse sub-structure. In view of the
probability of exposure of the walls to high tail-water, powerhouse walls shall also have
double layer of water-stop. Construction joints in the bottom and upstream face of the Main
Weir is to be treated similarly.
7.4.25.5 Water-stop Width
References do not provide specific criteria rules for the required width of water-stop in
different condition, which depend on factors like:
The type of foundation strata (Rock or Soil),
Probability of differential settlement (a) During construction arising from

construction sequence, or (b) One unit dewatered for maintenance in the in-
service condition,
Width of the expansion gap,
Hydrostatic pressure at the joint, and
Member dimensions,
Minimum width of water-stop is generally about 250mm (10 inch). The width specified in the
weir and powerhouse may be 300mm (12 inch), and shall be reviewed in the detail design
stage. The width of water-stop is decided in consideration of the listed parameters.
7 - 10
Engineering judgment is applied in the final selection of the water-stop restricting the
number of different types, for construction ease.
7.4.26 Temperature Variation Effects
Temperature variation equal to 200 C will be considered in the analyses carried out using
standard software, to include thermal stresses. To restrict the secondary stresses, provision
in the form of (I) Appropriate (vertical) construction joint locations, and (II) Shrinkage
reinforcement discussed later, shall be incorporated. Provisions of document ACI 207.2R-
95 Effect of Restraint, Volume Change and Reinforcement in Massive Concrete
Structures, and ACI 350R-01 Environmental Engineering Structures; shall be followed.
7.4.27 Shrinkage and Temperature Reinforcement
Minimum amount of this reinforcement as ratio of gross cross section area of the structure
component, shall be as under:
Shrinkage and Temperature Reinforcement, Ratio of Gross Area
Structure Condition Structures In Dry (*) Hydraulic Structures
Reinforcement Percentage 0.0020 0.0028
(*) Structures in dry include powerhouse superstructure, residences etc
7.4.28 Design of Main Weir and Stilling Basin Structures
7.4.28.1 Main Weir
Available Freeboard
The weir is basically a concrete gravity overflow section. The spillway crest is set at EL
1383m (FRL), and the weir top and bridge deck at EL 1387m. Allowing 0.50m for the girder
depth, net clearance available for flow and free board is 3.50m.
Sluiceways and Bottom Outlets
Four openings 3x3m for gated bottom outlets are provided in the center part, and three
openings 1.5x2m for gated undersluices have been provided near the right abutment. Gate
Hoist Frame is installed at each vertical gate. The crest EL of all the six outlets is EL
1377m. Due to (a) Uplift arising from retained water, (b) Artesian like conditions
encountered under the base, and (c) Sizeable openings provided within the body of weir;
the structure base width had to be increased compared to normal proportions, to makeup
for the lost weight, to achieve sliding and overturning stability.
Bridge
The road bridge has 3 spans of 11m, supported on 1m wide concrete piers. Deck elevation
is EL 1385m. Three pre-cast (or cast-in-situ) RC girders about 0.5m deep are provided in
each span. Overall width of the deck is 4m fixed in consideration of the requirement for
7 - 11
installation of vertical lift gates. Concrete curb 300x500mm, and steel pipe railing is
provided on either sides, leaving net roadway = 3m wide.
Surface Layer
The main (mass) construction may be in concrete with cement paste volume about 22
percent () by mass say C15 concrete. 0.75m thick layer of C25 concrete is provided (a)
On outer surface of the weir, and (b) Lining inside the Outlets, against water-tightness,
resistance to abrasion from water flow, and durability as per ref [2]. Reinforcement is also
placed in this layer.
Grout Curtain and Uplift
To curtail the uplift pressure, grout curtain is provided at 6m from the upstream (heel) of the
section. As an additional uplift curtailment measure, relief wells spaced at about 2m on
centers, may also be provided at this location. These wells discharge into a pipe embedded
in the body of weir, with invert EL 1375.25m, so that the discharge remaining above EL
1375m (top of the downstream sill), flows out into the stilling basin under gravity.
Effectiveness of these arrangements is discussed in Chapter-3 Geology, Geotechnical
and Construction Materials.
Stability Analysis
Pseudo-static stability of the weir structure is checked in both the normal and OBE
conditions. In view of (a) Uplift pressure, (b) Large openings provided in the weir body,
and (c) High seismic factor, stability analyses are important. Result of stability analyses
are provided below.
Condition Water EL (m) FOS Sliding Eccentricity Pmax (kN/m2)
Normal 1383.0 > 1.50 < B/6 180
OBE 1383.0 > 1.30 < B/4 220
7.4.28.2 Stilling Basin
Dimensions
In plan view, the weir is separated from the stilling basin by a transverse (to flow)
contraction joint, provided at the toe of pier. Floor of the stilling basin is set at EL 1373m.
The basin length from contraction joint at the downstream of main weir to the downstream
sill is 13m. Minimum specified strength of concrete shall be C20 preferably C28. The clear
inside width between flanking walls which contains the stilling basin, is (a) 38m, for Main
Weir / Sluiceway basin, and (b) About 11m, for Bottom Outlet Basin.
Basin Floor
The basin floor slab shall be proportioned against the uplift. Bed rock in this area is at
considerable depth. In view of the sandy gravel (poor) strata available under the floor, the
7 - 12
floor thickness is maintained 1m. Anchors #8 of depth 2m are proposed below EL 1372m /
bottom of basin floor, so that part of the uplift force is catered by self weight of slab, and
remaining by the rock anchors. The 1m slab thickness is also sufficient to meet the
anchorage requirement of #8 anchors embedded into the strata below. Drainage system
considered only an additional safety measure, is not provided under the basin floor slab due
to constraints in drainage disposal.
Side Walls of Main Weir Basin
Top elevation of the stilling basin side walls is set at EL 1377. The stilling basin comprise of
left wall and right wall, as detailed below.
Left Wall: The left wall is structurally a retaining wall of overall height = 5m, separated by a
longitudinal contraction joint in the basin floor, at about 1.5m from wall internal face. This
wall is designed as a cantilever retaining wall against earth pressure, and checked for water
pressure from inside when the basin is operating. Uplift under the wall is same as for basin
floor. The following load cases are checked.
(Case 1) Normal Condition: Backfill (up to EL 1377) in place, wheel load within a
distance equal to half the wall height giving rise to surcharge earth pressure =
0.6m, and inside dry, and
(Case 2) HFL Condition: Same as case 1 plus High Flood Condition, water level in
the basin at EL 1376m. Earth-fill in place.
Right Wall: The right wall physically divides the (38m wide) stilling basin of Main Weir and
(about 11m wide) stilling basin of the Bottom Outlets, and is structurally a Divide Wall. The
wall shall be monolithic with the floor of Bottom Outlet Basin forming a U-shaped section
on the right side. In the Main Weir Stilling Basin, a longitudinal contraction joint is provided
in the basin floor, at 2m from wall face, which structurally separates it from the basin floor.
This wall is proportioned for (I) Maximum hydrostatic head differential of 3.1m, which may
be caused if only one stilling basin is operating considering an exceptional load case; and
(II) Seismic (OBE) condition. In view of (a) Favorable (U) configuration, and (b) In the
seismic condition, water level considered on either side = EL 1375, hydrodynamic force (on
one side) and water suction (on the other side) is limited to 2m; stability of this wall shall
pose no problem.
7.5 Intake Structure and Connecting Conduit
7.5.1 Intake Structure
Structure Location
In the plan view, intake structure is located just upstream of Main Weir at the right abutment
(near Bottom Outlets), transverse to the Main Weir axis. The gate sill elevation is EL 1378.
Structurally, it is housed in a 1.8m wide concrete (Intake) wall integral and monolithic with
the massive main weir. Structurally, it is part of the main weir. The trash-rack screen,
bulkhead and service gates are housed in the Intake Wall. Gate hoisting frame is placed on
Gate Operation Platform at EL 1385.
7 - 13
Earth Pressure on Intake Wall
The Intake Structure is embodied in Intake Wall. Backfill is placed behind this wall. The wall
is proportioned to retain saturated and / or submerged earth-fill plus differential hydrostatic
head =1.5m probable in case of rapid depletion of the reservoir, without earthquake.
Earthquake is considered with hydrostatic pressure balanced on both sides.
7.5.2 Connecting Conduit, Wall Thickness
Due to the proximity from reservoir and probability of water level at the back rising to
reservoir level, resulting in submergence of the conduit, the 90o bend part of the conduit just
behind the Intake Wall, is designed as box section with wall thickness sufficient to offset the
buoyancy when the conduit may be empty. Calculation shows that minimum required wall
thickness disregarding weight of soil above the conduit is about 275mm. 300mm
thickness of wall is theoretically (structurally) sufficient. However, as the conduit is
connected with both the Intake Wall (at upstream) and Weir (at downstream); to forestall (I)
Probability of differential settlement between the (flexible) conduit and (rigid) weir
structures, and (II) Leakage from contraction joint into the conduit; (a) Any gap that may
form under the conduit box section due to deeper excavation for weir or Intake Wall in close
proximity, be filled with lean concrete; and (b) Both contraction joints to have two layers of
water-stop. From practical considerations of placing two layers of water-stops, the provided
wall thickness needs to be 600mm.
7.6 Conveyance Conduit

This is a reinforced concrete cut and cover conduit. The conduit has two parts (a)
Upstream Conduit (between Main Weir and Sand Trap), and (b) Downstream Conduit
(between Power Intake to Power Tunnel Portal); as detailed below (Refer Figure-7.1 for
details).
To forestall shrinkage cracks during construction and in-service condition from temperature
variations, vertical construction joint spacing in the range of 12m is considered reasonable.
Alternate joints may be contraction type. All vertical construction and / or contraction joints
shall have one or two rows of 250mm water-stop.
For reinforcement design, the conduit section is proportioned for:
- Self weight + Fill load corresponding to EL 1385,
- Self weight + Fill + Internal pressure corresponding to max. reservoir level
- In view of the height of earth-fill over the conduit being in excess of 2.5m, axle load
of any moving vehicles if considered, will be adjusted accordingly.
7.6.1 Upstream Conduit (between Main Weir and Sand Trap)
Length of this part from downstream of Main Weir to upstream of Sand Trap is about 42m.
At the upstream, floor elevation is about EL 1377.80 (), and at the downstream EL
1377.50, indicating (modest) gradient. The internal dimension (B*H) is 2.4*1.5m, wall
thickness is 300mm. With the maximum reservoir EL 1384.50, this part of the conduit is
relatively lightly pressurized. Structural design of this rectangular section is based on
conventional box culvert design using spreadsheet.
7 - 14
7.6.2 Downstream Conduit (between Power Intake and Tunnel Portal)
Length of downstream conduit from downstream of Sand Trap (Power Intake) to the tunnel
portal is about 70m. At the upstream, floor elevation is about EL 1374.75 (), which remains
almost constant (EL 1374) up to the downstream (tunnel portal), indicating (modest)
gradient. Outer dimension of the conduit is 3*3m square box with internal diameter = 2.4m.
With the maximum reservoir EL 1384.50, this part of the conduit is also relatively lightly
pressurized
7.7 Sand Trap
7.7.1 Structure
It is about 82m long reinforced concrete structure, bounded by expansion joints at both
upstream (upstream of Automated Intake Gate at the end of conduit) and downstream
(downstream of Power Intake Automated Gate).
7.7.2 Configuration
Shape of this structure is governed by the hydraulic design requirements. (I) In the cross
section, the structure has two (almost) identical chambers each 3.8m wide and 7.68m deep,
(II) In the longitudinal section structure height varies from about 3m at the upstream to
about 8.5m at the downstream, in the 82m length, due to sloping floor, (III) Slope of floor
in most part of the structure (67m) is 3 percent, (IV) The exterior walls may retain earth-fill
in the range of zero at upstream to about 8m at downstream (top EL 1379.74, bottom EL
1371.07). Due to (a) Considerable height, (b) Structures durability requirement, (c)
Permanent submergence and exposure to earth-fill; external wall thickness is maintained
600mm.
7.7.3 Spill Section
The spill (overflow) section is provided on the left wall, and is 10m wide. The crest is at EL
1379.44. A RC section with top width about 300mm and slope (batter) 1V:1H is provided on
the outer face of the left wall, abuts the spill section, to divert water away from the structure
up to the NSL (EL 1376). About 300mm thick concrete blocks, rip rap or similar protection
shall be provided at NSL downstream where slope of this section terminates, and level is
flush with the NSL. The sloping wall section is flanked by 300mm wide parapet of height
suiting site conditions (topography). Parapets are part of the spill section.
7.7.4 Construction and Contraction Joints
Except for three or four vertical construction joints required for construction ease and limit
concrete shrinkage, contraction joint may not be provided in the 82m long structure. All
construction joints shall have minimum one water-stop provided in the mid thickness.
7.7.5 Exterior Walls
In view of the considerable structure length and 7m height of retained earth-fill, exterior
walls are not designed as cantilever retaining walls. For economy in cost, top beam is
7 - 15
provided at top (EL 1379.80) to support the wall. The wall is spanning as slab between top
beam and structures bottom. The top beam over these walls is 800*500 (b*h) tied by cross
struts (tie beams). Due to balanced earth-filling on either side, these struts remain in
compression in normal loading case. However, these will be checked in tension for inside
water level EL 1379.25, partially ignoring the external earth pressure. In consideration of the
varying structure height, spacing of (strut) tie beams may not be constant and is varied from
5m () at the upstream to 3m () at the downstream. For construction ease spacing is
maintained about 4.5m constant.
7.7.6 Center (Divide) Wall
Due to the structures configuration, this wall is not subjected to imbalanced hydrostatic
pressure in the in-service condition. Length in plan view of this wall is about 65m. It serves
as intermediate support for (strut) beams or any passage slab (provided between Exterior
Walls) at EL 1379.80. Like the exterior walls, interior wall also span between top beam and
structure bottom. In the seismic condition, this wall is subjected to seismic inertial and
hydrodynamic forces. Water level considered on either side = EL 1379.25, hydrodynamic
head (on one side) and water suction (on the other side) is about 8.7m, which poses
considerable flexural force. However, due to (a) Reduction factor applied on suction and
hydrodynamic forces because of limited width of chambers (3.8m); (b) Vertical spanning
between the structure base and wall top (instead of cantilever behavior); and (c) structural
thickness and the design reinforcement is unlikely to be excessive.
7.7.7 Downstream (End) Wall
The downstream wall houses the Power Intake structure block. The 7.8m width structurally
spans between the (exterior) longitudinal walls and the (two) baffles of power intake. The
baffles in-turn span between the structure bottom and top beam. This 600mm thick wall is
basically a horizontal slab, proportioned (a) Against earth-fill on the outer side, and (b)
Hydrostatic pressure from the inside partly disregarding earth pressure. Due to small
(horizontal) span and ample structural thickness, resulting in the design reinforcement
probably lesser than the minimum requirement, earthquake consideration may be
disregarded in the reinforcement design. Middle part of this wall, which houses Power
Intake, is considered part of power intake.
7.7.8 Structures Stability
Due to (a) Favorable structures geometry (small height to width ratio), (b) Small uplift
due to location away from the reservoir, and (c) Passive resistance available from the soil
mass which abuts; stability of this structure as a whole, pose no problem in the event of
earthquake.
7.8 Power Intake
Power Intake structure block at the downstream of Sand Trap is integral part of Sand Trap
structure. It houses the trash-rack and control gate on the upstream. The invert elevation is
set at EL 1378.0. A 4.5m long rectangular concrete block provided at the upstream of
expansion joint between power intake and conduit up to power tunnel is also part of the
7 - 16
Power Intake. The Sand Trap (and Power Intake structure) is separated by the downstream
conduit by an expansion joint provided at about 4m from the downstream wall. In view of the
requirement of double row of water-stop in the expansion joint, and somewhat larger section
dimensions due to bell mouth, wall thickness of this block, is maintained = 750mm. As the
block is monolithic with / part of Sand Trap, structurally the Intake is not treated as an
independent structure. Design approach of this block is similar to box culvert (conduit). Gate
Hoist Frame is installed at EL 1379.80. Hoist Frame height and configuration is decided by
E&M considerations.
7.9 Power Tunnel Portal
7.9.1 General
Portal is a short structure provided between the downstream conduit and the typical tunnel
at (a) The entrance into the rock strata, or (b) At downstream of the tunnel. It is
separated from other components structures, by expansion or contraction joints. Details are
given in Figure-7.2 Typical Tunnel and Portal.
7.9.2 Structure Length
Excavation of tunnel and portals in Jabori Hydropower Project is foreseen by drill and
blasting method. Sufficient rock cover should be available to the tunnel constructed by this
method. Purpose of the portal is to provide a stable vertical face and a short start-up into
sound (relatively un-fractured) rock. The excavation in open at the upstream of portal, and
the structural length of portal, is based on the consideration that about 2Do cover is
available to the tunnel (Do = Outer diameter of excavation). The length of portal between
the expansion joint with conduit and contraction joint with typical tunnel, is 9 to 10m, of
which, about 7m is in the rock mass, and remaining protrudes from the rock face (in open),
and quite massive. This is provided to:
- Forestall any loose rock falling at the entrance of tunnel, and
- Accommodate any drain if required by site conditions,
Initial length of the portal structure is used as transition to transform rectangular shape into
horseshoe shape of the typical tunnel. To facilitate construction, and drainage in the in-
service condition; retaining walls (transverse to tunnel axis) about 4m high, and length
suiting the site conditions, flanks the portal on either side, to create clear space near the
inlet or outlet of this long tunnel.
7.9.3 Rock Support System
Construction sequence of portal will be given in the notes in construction drawing and
discussed / detailed later. The project area falls in seismically active zone. For the design of
permanent rock supports of portal, rock type in the initial (about 8m) part is considered as
fractured.
7.9.4 Steel Ribs
Basic supporting of rock in the New Austrian Tunneling Method (NATM) is by steel ribs (H-
Beams) bent according to the inside geometry, mounted on concrete pedestal (support);
7 - 17
with sprayed shotcrete and 100*100*5mm wire mesh. In the reinforcement design, the steel
rib is considered as a part of the outer face (extrados) reinforcement. Steel rib (say
200*200*8) serves as permanent support during construction and in-service conditions to
take-up the rock loads without rock bolting. The design calculation for steel rib may be
based on a lesser vertical rock load coefficient than is theoretically arrived, considering that:
- Rock load is not fully mobilized immediately after rock blasting,
- Rock supporting is also shared by shotcrete,
- Once the concrete lining is in place and maximum rock load is mobilized, extrados
reinforcement area available from the steel ribs is in excess of the calculated
reinforcement requirement.
Hydraulic factor is not separately applied to this (transient) loading case.
Weight of one set of steel rib is estimated to be about 0.5t.. Each rib is fabricated in
segments with end plates secured by high strength bolts. Three steel ribs are proposed at
the rock face (portal entrance) one projecting outside, for safety during construction. In the
remaining part steel ribs are equally spaced.
7.9.5 Rock Bolts
Two or three rows of horizontal rock bolts are provided upstream of portal at the crown.
Rock bolts are omitted in the inside of portal in radial direction for length equal to that of
horizontal rock bolts, to:
- Avoid interference with the horizontal rock bolts (at the upstream crown),
- Avoid delay in installation of any steel rib supports inside,
Other features of rock support shall be established at detailed design stage.
7.9.6 Reinforced Concrete Design
Adopted concrete lining thickness is 600mm. The section is proportioned (a) At the
upstream portal, for the (external) fractured rock loads usually encountered at portals and
the self weight of lining for bending moment. Magnitude of internal pressure at this location
is small, (b) At the downstream, portal is designed for the (external) fractured rock loads
and the self weight for bending, and checked against maximum internal pressure
disregarding external rock pressure. Factor for vertical rock loading for calculating bending
moment on tunnels, specified in the US Army Corps of Engineers Engineering Manual EM
1110-2-2901 Tunnels and Shafts in Rock, is 0.30 to 0.60 times the height (excavated
diameter) of tunnel. For portal structure, factor equal to 1.50 shall be adopted in our
analysis, which applies to quite loose rock conditions and may be encountered in the initial
stretch of tunnel. Adjustment in external loads [lateral rock pressure equal to one half the
vertical pressure increased by 30 percent for excavation by blasting], given under the
General Recommendations for Loads and Distortions in the EM shall be made. In view of
the non-circular shape of the tunnel portal, other adjustments for rock loading detailed in EM
7 - 18
1110-2-2901 for non-circular shapes, shall also be applicable. As detailed later, some
length of the tunnel at upstream and downstream shall be steel lined the portals are also
likely to be steel lined.
7.9.6.1 Reinforcement Design
Unit weight of rock to be taken in the analyses simulates wet rock loads. Analysis is carried
out by using method outlined in the USBR Engineering Monograph No 14. For the
horseshoe shape (Shape E) with internal diameter 2.0m, thickness of concrete lining is
maintained about 600mm. Hydraulic Factor = 1.30 as per ACI 350R-95 Environmental
Engineering Structures, is to be applied to the factored design bending moment for
calculating the reinforcement. Earthquake effects are not separately included in the design
of this (underground) structure.
7.9.6.2 Reinforcement Placing
Analysis generally shows considerable negative BM existing at the junction of sides and
bottom (floor). Extra bars may be provided at these junctions in the needed length. Later the
steel placing is normal.
7.10 Power Tunnel
7.10.1 General
Typical tunnel is horseshoe shape of internal diameter = 2m. Reinforced concrete lining
thickness is 350mm. Steel lining, often provided in power tunnels, is foreseen only in limited
length at the inlet and outlet of tunnel. For the purpose of structural design, the tunnel length
may be divided into few different sections based on (a) Rock quality and (b) Provision or
otherwise of the steel liner; at the given location. Due to provision of mild slope in the tunnel
alignment, the internal hydrostatic pressure does not vary to an extent that may warrant
separate analyses.
7.10.2 External Hydrostatic Pressure
Unlike a typical power tunnel layout in a high mountain, upstream of this tunnel is not
directly exposed to reservoir. The surrounding strata are not subjected to external
hydrostatic pressure. Phreatic Line [Line representing external hydrostatic pressure
reducing towards downstream, magnitude at a given location depends on the distance from
the reservoir, tail-water level, and permeability of the strata] is not there. External water
pressure is generally not involved here, and does not govern the design; exception being a
non-perennial stream encountered in the tunnel alignment, (a) Site topography, and (b)
Duration of flow in the stream, warrant consideration of the external pressure.
7.10.3 Rock Loads
The foreseen method of excavation of tunnel is blasting, for which the Engineering Manual
EM 1110-2-2901, specifies 30 percent increase in external horizontal rock pressure
compared to the tunnel driven by boring machine. This criteria shall be adopted in the
reinforcement design.
7 - 19
7.10.4 Design Load Cases
Typical Tunnel: The horseshoe section is designed against the external rock pressure when
the tunnel is empty, and checked against internal hydrostatic pressure plus water hammer
effects (in the event of load rejection). Contribution of rock loads is included in one design
load case with internal hydrostatic pressure, and disregarded in the other. Following Load
cases are studied:
Load Case 1 Construction Condition: Vertical and horizontal rock loads combined
with the self weight of tunnel, without any internal hydrostatic pressure. This load
condition is encountered at the end of construction.
Load Case 2 Load Rejection in the in-Service Condition: Vertical and horizontal
rock load, plus self weight of tunnel concrete lining, plus maximum internal
hydrostatic pressure up to the tunnel crown, plus weight of water contained inside
the section. Reduction factor to account for the water hammer effect applied to
internal hydrostatic pressure. This case governs over the in-service condition.
Load Case 3 Load Rejection in the in-Service Condition (Rock Loads

Disregarded): This case envisage the tunnel as free standing conduit. Loading
includes (a) Self weight of tunnel concrete lining, (b) Maximum internal
hydrostatic pressure up to the tunnel crown (factored to account for water hammer
effect), (c) Weight of water contained inside the section. Reduction factor to
account for the water hammer effect applied to load (b).
The provided reinforcement is based on load case 3. This approach is quite conservative.
However, in view of (a) the importance of the project, and (b) The small internal
diameter (2m) and moderate hydrostatic head, resulting in the design reinforcement within
economical range, the reinforcement design is based on this premise.
7.10.5 Method of Design
The structural design is based on conventional method using spreadsheet. Method of

analysis is based on design coefficients for given loadings provided in USBR document
under ref [11]. Finite element method of analyses, using beam elements supported by
vertical and horizontal springs, shall be used in the detail design stage to check the design.
7.10.6 Rock Anchors and Consolidation Grouting
Rock anchors are part of rock mass stabilization measures, which is based on the specific
geological condition encountered at any given location. For drill and blast excavations initial
ground support is usually installed after the round is shot and mucked out and before drilling
for the next round. Provision of rock anchors is generally limited to about 120o arc in the
crown region where danger of vertical rock spalling is maximum. Rock anchors and
shotcrete forms part of the initial ground support system. More details on Rock Support
System are provided in Chapter-3 Geology, Geotechnical Engineering and Construction
Materials.
7 - 20
Consolidation grouting is also part of rock mass stabilization measures. It is needed all
around the tunnel, and usually carried out after the construction of the tunnel. It fills in the
fissures and cracks present in the rock mass in proximity of excavated bore. Grouting in
rock is usually with cement. Grout Holes are left at suitable location in the concrete lining for
subsequent consolidation grouting. At times seepage from the rock mass around the
excavated bore (due to heavy rain) requires consolidation grouting before construction of
tunnel to limit the seepage amount. In this case part of the consolidation grouting is done
before tunnel construction.
7.10.7 Contact Grouting
Contact grouting is provided for improved contact at the interface of rock and concrete lining
of the constructed tunnel where small gap may form between concrete and rock surfaces
due to concrete placing against gravity or shrinkage. Like the rock anchors, extent of this
grouting is generally limited to about 120o arc in the crown region. Grout Holes are left at
suitable location in the concrete lining for this purpose.
7.10.8 Contraction Joints
These joints are provided to limit the total contraction in concrete. The tunnel including the
portals, is about 1535m long. The portals being more massive than typical tunnel are
separated from tunnel by transverse to flow, vertical contraction joints. The longitudinal
reinforcement will be stopped at these joints, and two components connected by dowels.
Vertical contraction joints shall have water-stop in mid-thickness.
Partial contraction joint between the segments of the tunnel lining may be formed by
providing about 35mm deep groove (0.10 of lining thickness) to arrest formation of cracks in
the tunnel length between contraction joints. This type of joint may be easier to construct, as
(a) Water-stop may be omitted (it is better to provide), and (b) Construction can be
carried out in 70m long segments. Viability of such joints in pressurized power tunnel will be
investigated in the detail design stage.
7.10.9 Construction Joints
The term is applied specifically to transverse vertical construction joints. Full longitudinal
reinforcement crosses the construction joint. If the adopted spacing of contraction joints is
as proposed, then structurally there is no need of construction joints between the
contraction joints. Where provided construction joints with water-stop is for convenience in
construction as normal.
7.11 Surge Shaft
In the present layout, the concrete lined power tunnel including the portals is about 1060m
long. The tunnel terminates at the surge shaft. Salient features of the surge shaft are given
below:
Design diameter = 3m
Bottom (floor) level = 1372.9m
7 - 21
Top of shaft level = 1387.9m
Height of shaft = 15m
Concrete lining thickness = 400mm,
Permanent lining shall be in-situ concrete,
Circular Shape: Circular shape is most favorable for opening stability and lining design.
Sufficient rock mass is present all around the 4m diameter excavation to impart the needed
stability to a vertical bore and accommodate needed rock bolts.
Excavation: Excavation diameter of the shaft is 4m which is considered insufficient for

working of a road header machine. Excavation may be done by controlled blasting [Shaft
blasting is more difficult and more confined than tunnel blasting. Typically shorter rounds
are pulled and powder factor is greater than for a tunnel in the same rock]. The shaft may
pass through variety of ground conditions including fractured rock. In Jabori HPP at the
location of surge shaft, rock is not much hard but fairly good and ground water is not likely
to be present, which may facilitate the excavation and ground supporting work.
Ground Supporting and Consolidation Grouting: Available methods of ground support for
the given size of shaft and relatively limited magnitude of work may be shotcreting and rock
bolts preferably without wire-mesh. Fiber reinforced shotcrete is more ductile. Welded wire
fabric usually applied between the first and second coat of shotcrete for increased ductility
is (a) Laborious, (b) Costly to place, (c) It is difficult to obtain good shotcrete quality
around and behind wires due to rebound, and (d) Often result in greater required
shotcrete volumes, because the fabric cannot be draped close to the rock surface on
irregularly shot surface. When circularity is well controlled, circular shafts generally do not
require internal bracing. Consolidation Grouting carried out after the construction of the
shaft fills in the fissures and cracks present in the rock mass and is an important step in
rock supporting high vertical rock cuts. Grouting in rock is usually with cement. Shaft
grouting typically starts with the drilling of two or three rows of grout holes around the shaft
perimeter, spaced 1.5 to 2m. Grout injection is usually performed from bottom up using
packers.
Shaft Construction: Most shaft construction requires initial construction of a shaft collar
structure that supports overburden and weathered rock near the surface and construction
loads adjacent to the top of shaft.
Design of Concrete Lining: The concrete lining is mainly subjected to compressive force due
to external rock pressure (opposite of Hoop Stress) and the vertical load of self weight. Due
to compressive nature of radial stress, buckling of lining is one of the involved
considerations. Dowels protruding from the rock surface will not only assist in restraining the
buckling, but also transferring part of the load to rock interface. Dowels shall be provided
and anchored into the concrete lining. Floor of the shaft will be made sufficiently thick and
reinforced adequately to span a circle of 3m diameter supporting part of the shaft lining
weight. In view of the fact that excavated shaft surface is in one alignment and the lining
7 - 22
thickness is constant, it implies that the finished internal diameter of shaft will be 3m
constant along the height.
Reference Figure: Structural Details of Surge Shaft are shown in Figure-7.11 Surge Shaft.
7.12 Steel Liner
Requirement: Steel liner is required along certain reaches of the tunnel to provide positive
control of leakage and / or to withstand the internal design pressure [Ref: Part V Design
and Construction of Steel Tunnel Liners, Ref [13]].
Hydrostatic Head: Maximum operating (water) level in the Sand Trap which acts as Intake
for power tunnel, is EL 1379.25m. The EL of centerline of tunnel at downstream end is
1374.9 (). It implies that average hydrostatic pressure inside the tunnel is about 4.25m.
Due to this (moderate) head, the tunnel is not critically pressurized. Reinforced concrete
lining thickness of 350mm is considered sufficient to withstand the hydrostatic pressure
without requirement of steel liner.
Implications on Project Cost and Construction Time: (a) Cost impact of providing steel
liner with external stiffeners (needed for adequate anchorage of the steel liner into concrete
mass); in about 1060m long tunnel; on the overall project cost is quite substantial, (b)
Provision of steel liner is also likely to affect the foreign exchange component of the project,
(c) Overall construction time is also affected due to requirement of (i) Liner Fabrication
in workshop (bending accurately according to tunnel geometry), (ii) Transportation, (iii)
Alignment of steel Cans inside the tunnel in their final location, and (iv) In-situ welding of
Cans and radiography of the welded joints, needed for joining one steel Can with the other;
(v) Coal-tar Epoxy or other bitumen painting on the liner surface, in the stringent
construction conditions and remote site location.
Conclusion: Steel lining, often provided in power tunnels, is not foreseen in Jabori HPP.
7.13 Steel Penstock and Manifold
7.13.1 Penstock
Penstock starts from downstream of surge shaft. Its function is to deliver water to power
units from the tunnel through the manifold block. Liner thickness is 20mm, design internal
diameter 1.5m. The length is about 510m ().
7.13.2 Material
The penstock may be built with steel plates conforming to ASTM A 36 (yield strength =
250MPa or 36,000psi), or (preferably) other (higher strength) material (A 516, A 588 etc). In
case of steel plates conforming to ASTM A 36, (a) Weldability of the plate material itself,
and particularly with other steel sections (flats, tees etc used in croth-girder in manifold
block or elsewhere) is better than other types of steel pates (A 588 etc); (b) Is readily
available in the market, and (c) Considered easier to fabricate. In view of the corroding
nature of this material, corrosion allowance of 2mm shall need to be added to the design
plate thickness. Steel plates conforming to ASTM A 516 have higher yield strength and
7 - 23
considered non-corroding. However weld-ability of these plates with other steel sections
conforming to ASTM A 36, is not as good. These plates are also manufactured / available in
Pakistan, and could be a suitable alternative.
7.13.3 Design
The penstock pipe is proportioned against the internal hydrostatic pressure in the range of
25m to 135m plus water hammer effects, and checked for hydrodynamic loads added to
hydrostatic pressure, disregarding water hammer. Permitted increase in allowable stress in
these (exceptional) load conditions is incorporated in the design by multiplying the factored
hydrostatic pressure with suitable reduction factor.
7.13.4 Finishes
On the inner surface where water flow under pressure is persistent, three coats of coal-tar
epoxy or other suitable finish is necessary. On the outer surface, similar or other corrosion
resistant finish is normally provided.
7.13.5 Manifold Block
The manifold block divides the flows from a single steel penstock to more than one
generating units, transferring the flow into lesser diameter pipes. The design head is 140m
(). Considerations related to the design and material selection of this block are similar to
the penstock.
7.14 Powerhouse
7.14.1 Features
General features of powerhouse structure are listed below. Refer Figure-7.3.
Generation capacity about 6.46 MW,
No of (identical) generating units = two
Type of generating units Francis
Size in plan view including Erection Bay, 37.75*18m (overall),
Foundation level ~EL 1249.30
Draft tube invert level EL 1249.30
Turbine floor level ~ EL 1254.40
Gantry crane rail level 1265.00
Clearance between gantry crane rails to the soffit of roof girders = 3.7m
Structural depth of roof structure = 1.3m () including finishes,
Minimum tail water EL 1256.20m,
Maximum tail water level EL 1260.0m,
7 - 24
7.14.2 Structural Configuration
The powerhouse has two distinct blocks, separated by an expansion joint (a) Powerhouse
Block, and (b) Control Room Block.
7.14.2.1 Control Room Block
This is a single storey structure on the right of Power Units Block. Plan view dimensions are
about 6*17m. It houses (a) Control Room, (b) DC Battery Room, (c) RE Room, (d)
Toilets, and (e) Car Porch. The structure is reinforced concrete (RC) walls 225mm ().
The roof slab is 300mm thick, supported on RC walls. The floor level in this block is
1260.5m. The foundation level about 1259.0m, is slightly below the high tail-water level
(EL 1260m). The structure is not subjected to overall uplift.
7.14.2.2 Powerhouse Block
This block has two parts (a) Power Units Block, and (b) Erection Bay Block. It is a
massive RC block designed to withstand maximum uplift in the event of high flood, by a
reasonable margin of safety. Overall plan view dimensions including the Unloading and
Erection Bay, are 37.75*18m. Thickness of outer RC columns is = 1.0m, leaving net internal
dimension 36*16m. The probable high TWL (EL 1260.0) during HFL will cause uplift.
Thickness of the raft slab presently shown = 5.1m is checked for this flood level. The
available factor of safety (FOS) in flotation is (a) With minimum tail-water (EL 1256.20m)
is > (required) 1.50, and (b) With maximum tail-water (EL 1260.00m) is > (required) 1.25;
and considered adequate. The draft tube gate control is provided at EL 1261.0, giving free
board margin (above HFL) to top of RC walls = 1m. From considerations of (a) FOS
against flotation, and (b) The amount of energy contained in incoming flows, the
substructure up to draft tube gate hoisting level (EL 1261) is massive (reinforced concrete)
raft and walls. Five 1.2*3m (b*h) buttresses (baffles) are provided at the downstream from
foundation level (EL 1249.30) to draft tube deck level (EL 1261.0), flanking the draft tube
openings to support the (1m thick) draft tube deck slab top EL 1261. Above EL 1261, RC
columns rise up to the roof level. As shown in powerhouse cross section figure, 1*0.75m
column width (1m) is reduced above gantry crane rail level EL 1265.0 to (a) Reduce
gantry crane load lever-arm on the supporting bracket, and (b) Increase side clearance
between gantry crane body and face of mullion column (structure).
7.14.2.3 Unloading and Erection Bay Block
Structurally, this block is monolithic with and a part of the powerhouse block. Area 8*16m is
available at Operating Floor level (EL 1254.4) under the Unloading and Erection Bay (EL
1260.50). This space is utilized for (a) Diesel, lubricants and oil storage, (b) Tools and
Spares Store, and (c) Maintenance Workshop. Two 400 thick RC walls divides the 16m
length in three equal spans, to support two-way slab of clear span (about) 8*5m, under the
Erection Bay floor slab designed against 35 to 40kN/m2 (un-factored) live load. Thickness of
Erection Floor slab at EL 1260.50m is 750mm. Thickness of wall between Powerhouse and
Erection Bay is 400mm. Raft slab thickness = 1.2m was adequate against structural
requirement, however this is maintained 2m to achieve the needed factor of safety (FOS) in
flotation under minimum and maximum tail-water conditions.
7 - 25
7.14.2.4 Construction Joints
Raft slab is about 5m thick which must be poured in minimum two about equal lifts.
Minimum two vertical construction joints at (a) between two Units, and (b) Junction of
Unit Bay and Erection Bay need to be provided to limit the magnitude of concrete shrinkage.
These vertical construction joints shall have double layer of 300mm wide PVC / rubber
water-stops all around the both top and bottom of slab, to forestall probability of ingress of
water under pressure from below, into the vertical joint.
7.14.2.5 Roofing System and Roof Insulation
Clear headroom between operating floor (EL 1254.40) to bearing level of supporting girders
(EL 1268.8) is 14.4m. In view of high headroom, the construction needs to be pre-cast
type. Due to moderate span, either (a) Double tee roofing sections, (b) Pre-stressed I-
girders with pre-cast core slab panels, or (c) Similar (pre-cast) roofing system may be
adopted. The roof insulation (on top) will be conventional type applicable to flat surface
involving bitumen, polythene sheet, 50mm high density polystyrene foam, second layer of
polythene sheet, mud + husk layer, and brick (or concrete) roof tiles.
7.14.2.6 Structural Design
The substructure comprises of more than 5m thick raft slab and 1m (and thicker) reinforced
concrete (RC) walls up to EL 1261. The superstructure shall be braced RC which rise from
EL 1261. With the exception of about 7m wide trailer opening to Erection Bay floor, columns
are tied at (a) At EL 1265 (), and (b) At EL 1268.8 (Crane Beam top). The structure is
designed against the dead, live, gantry crane load and impact (capacity 35t), uplift, flotation,
and seismic forces for the applicable loading cases in Normal, Exceptional, and Extreme
loading conditions. Recommended impact and live load factor are applied to gantry crane
and other loads, in the design of powerhouse superstructure. Analyses shall be carried out
using standard software SAP 2000. Structure is modeled using beam elements with the
column base restrained. Appropriate degrees of freedom (of translation and rotation) in the
X, Y and Z axes applied to other elements.
7.15 Switchyard
Conventional Switchyard structure is adopted in the Jabori HPP. The foundation structures
will be designed for line pull, equipment loads, dead loads and wind loads in accordance
with the requirements of NEMA Standards Publication No SG-6, or an equivalent standard.
Cable trenches are designed as concrete open channel structures covered with pre-cast
concrete cover slabs.
7.16 Residences
7.16.1 Architectural Planning
The residences shall be (a) Single Officers Quarters (SOQ) covered area about 60 ()
square meters (comprising front verandah, study room, bed room and toilet + kitchenette at
rear); for permanent residents, or (b) Hostel type (total ten rooms with attached bath and
7 - 26
dressing, each room of approx dimensions 5.5*6.5m) five rooms in a row separated by 8ft
wide passage plus lounge, dining, kitchen and wide front verandah.
Architectural planning including the general design of doors and windows, roof insulation,
interior and exterior finishes, fire place design and air-conditioner location, drainage,
security provisions, and other features like landscaping shall consider the (a) Isolated
location of the site, (b) Cold weather conditions and (c) Security concerns in the area.
7.16.2 Construction
General specifications / requirements are detailed below:
Single Storey Load Bearing Construction: The construction shall be single

storey, load bearing type brick masonry in CS mortar.
Door and Windows: Steel windows shall be (a) Sliding type, (b) Steel grill and
wire mesh shall be provided for security and keeping away flies. Exterior doors shall
be single leaf double door (solid wooden + steel grill and wire-mesh door), for
security and to facilitate air circulation and entry of natural light during load-shedding
times.
Slab: Generally cast in situ RC slab shall be used.
Finishes: Exterior walls shall be plastered by CS mortar. Interior walls plastered by

CS mortar with 25 percent lime (of total cement content). Flooring shall be 20mm
marble tiles over minimum 60mm concrete over 150mm stone ballast + compacted
earth. Interior of washrooms and toilets shall be finished with glazed ceramic tiles
150*150mm or larger size.
Roof Slab Insulation: Roof will be insulated with polystyrene foam or similar
insulation, provided below the typical (grouted) brick tiles and earth.
Plinth Level: In view of remote location, the plinth level may be somewhat higher
than usual (2ft above the road level), for increased safety.
Damp Proof Course (DPC): Minimum thickness of concrete to be 50mm. Three to

four percent (of weight of cement), waterproofing admixture shall be added in
concrete. Two coats of bitumen or similar water resistant membrane is provided over
concrete layer. Polythene sheet is avoided.
Seismic Design Considerations: In view of high seismic factor, (a) Band beam
shall be provided at plinth and lintel (door top) levels, (b) No wall shall be lesser
than 225mm, (c) Ratio of height/thickness or length/thickness shall not exceed 20,
(c) Other measures for construction in earthquake zones, recommended by
Ministry of Housing Islamabad, for single storey dwellings, shall be adopted.
7.16.3 Allied Facilities
Number of users, family status (single / family), grade and requirements (temporary or
permanent stay); of prospective residents, are not fully known at this stage. In view of (a)
The remote location, (b) Severe (cold) climate, and (c) Security concerns; allied facilities
required for SOQ and hostel include but not limited to the following:
7 - 27
Messing and filtered drinking water,
Prayer Room with ablution and toilet facility,
Lockable car parking garage, plus sitting under shade and toilet facility for drivers in
waiting, cooks or gardener on duty, or visiting outsiders,
Split type main gate (separate for pedestrians and vehicles), Security Check Post
and boundary wall,
Lawn, outside lighting, benches, jogging track,
Intercom system connecting all houses with Mess and Security Check Post
Indoor games and common lounge with cable / dish antenna facility,
Small Tuck Shop, etc.
7 - 28
FIGURES
CHAPTER
8
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT STUDIES AND

POWER SIMULATION
CHAPTER 8
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT STUDIES AND POWER SIMULATION
A. Mechanical Equipment Studies
8.1 General
This section presents a general description of the design criteria and the actual design/
selection of major mechanical equipments and systems forming part of Jabori Hydropower
Plant. These include turbines, governors, inlet valves, gates, stoplogs, trash racks, cranes
and hoists etc.
8.2 Codes and Standards
The design will conform to the applicable portions of the following codes and standards:
1 DIN - Deutsche Industrial Normen.
2 EN - European Standard.
3 ISO - International Organization for Standardization.
4 FEM - Federation European de la Mauntention.

5 ASTM - American Society for Testing and Materials.
6 ACSE - Americans Society for Civil Engineers. Manuals and Reports on Engineering
Practice No. 79-Steel Penstocks, 1993.
7 AWWA - American Water Works Association.
8 CMAA - Crane Manufacturers Association of America. Specifications for Top
Running Bridge and Gantry Type Multiple Girder Electric Overhead Traveling cranes
- NO. 70.
9 ABMA - Americans Bearing Manufactures Association.
10 AGMA - Americans Gear Manufactures Association.
11 HMI - Hoist Manufacturers Institute.
12 NEC - National Electric Code.
13 NEI - National Elevator Industry, Inc.
14 NFPA - National Fire Protection Association.
15 NFP(A) - National Fluid Protection Association.
16 PPI - Plastic Pipe Institute.
17 SSPC - Steel Structures Painting Council.
18 UL - Underwriters Laboratories Inc.
8-1
19 FM - Factory Mutual Engineering and Research Corporation.
20 IAPMO - International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials:
21 I EC - International Electro technical Commission.
8.3 Turbines
8.3.1 Operating Water Levels and Heads
Water levels as per design study are as follows:
a) Maximum Head Water Level (HWL max. ) = 1379.25 masl
b) Minimum Head Water Level (HWL min. ) = 1378 masl
c) Maximum Tail Water Level (TWL max. ) = 1260 masl
d) Minimum Tail Water Level (TWL min. ) = 1256.2 masl
Head Losses upto Turbine Entrance = 6 m
The maximum net head is estimated as 117 m and the minimum net head available is
112m. Considering the maximum and minimum net heads the rated head is worked out as
114 m.
8.3.2 Design Flow and Rated Flow.
From initial estimation of power potential based on water availability, it has been established
that flow available would vary from 6.28 m3/sec to 1.75 m3/sec. Based on daily flows,
6.28m3/sec at 30% exceedance has been considered for turbine selection as rated flow.
8.3.3 Turbine Selection
Considering operating net head of 114 m, rated flow of 6.28m3/sec along with monthly net
water availability estimation as given in section 4.5.9 and Table-4.8, and the optimized
power potential as per Table-8.1; two turbines each of 3.14 m3/sec flow, have been
selected. Both turbines will be operated up to 60% exceedance and further 40% of the time
only one machine of 3.14m3/s will remain functional.
Two units have been selected, so that maximum generation may be obtained and
energy loss minimized when one unit is out of service due to non-availability of
water.
The number and size of units have been selected to ensure that the plant will
operate at peak efficiency for as much of the time as is possible.
The design discharge of 2m3/s for three (3) turbines of equal capacity, has not been
selected because the cost of civil works will be more for three units as compared to
two units.
8-2
One large unit of 6.28m3/s flow has not been considered since this will increase
forced outage during period of less than 45% of design flow. Cavitation and vibration
problems limit Francis turbines to a minimum discharge of 50 percent of the rated
flow.
Two equal discharge units each of 3.14 m3/sec have been selected. Though the
mixed flow units give slightly higher annual energy as compared to the equal
capacity turbines (Table-8.1-Alternative 2), yet this will result in additional cost in
terms of separate spare parts and varieties of electro-mechanical equipment.
8.3.3.1 Turbine Type
For the rated net head of 114m and rated flow of 6.28 m3/s, the power will be 6461KW,
considering turbine efficiency of 92% (TurbnPro-Hill curve, Figure-8.3). This will result in
turbine specific speed of (Ns) 114.6m-KW.
The foregoing parameters reaffirm that Francis Turbines are the most suitable units for
Jabori Hydropower Plant (Figure-8.1 and Figure-8.2).
Considering the above design head, specific speed and rotational speed, the average
runner diameter of the turbine would be 728mm. The net head and discharge is such that
horizontal axis Francis Turbines would be more economical. Experience shows that
compared with the vertical settings, the civil works cost of the powerhouse with horizontal
setting, can be reduced by about 20% because of:
i) less excavation;
ii) Simple substructure;
iii) Smaller height of the powerhouse;
iv) Use of conical draft tube.
Additional advantages of horizontal settings are:
i) Easy inspection during operation and accessibility during maintenance;
ii) Ease of installing flywheels to improve speed regulation;
iii) Installation is somewhat easier.
iv) Less sensitive to minor mis-alignment of shafts.
The outlet structure of the turbine tailrace spill into the river bed with minimum tail water
level at El. 1256.2 masl. The setting of turbine centre line is at 1255.2 masl for both
turbines.
8.3.3.2 Principal Design Parameters
8-3
Principal design parameters have been tabulated hereunder for the recommended turbines
for Jabori Hydropower Project. As stated earlier, these parameters are the result of analysis
of a number of turbine solutions.
Turbine parameters need to be confirmed during the design stage on the basis of up-to-date
hydrological and other features of the project combined with more specific information
obtained from the turbine manufacturers.
Main Hydraulic Data of Turbine Layout
Characteristics Unit Intake / Powerhouse

Head Water Level (max) masl 1379.25
Head Water Level (min) masl 1378
Tail Water Level (max) masl 1260
Tail Water Level (min) masl 1256.2
H gross (Range) m 118 ~ 123.05
Head Loss m 6
H net (Range) m 112~117.05
Main Parameters of Turbines, (capacity given ex turbine unit)
Characteristic Unit Data

Type of Turbine -- Horizontal Shaft
Francis
Number of Units -- Two
Q design/rated m3/s 3.14
H rated m 114
P rated power KW 6461 (both units)
Runner diameter mm 728
Setting of Turbine centre line with reference to minimum m -1 (Ref. Annex II)
tail water level.
Rated speed rpm 750 (Ref. Annex II)
Specific speed (Ns) rpm 114.6 m-KW (Ref.
Annex II)
Runaway speed at rated head (Nr) rpm 1256
Spiral case inlet diameter mm 760
Height of wicket gate mm 142.00
8.3.3.3 Turbine Centerline Setting
Francis Turbines must be set at level which avoids cavitation arising from insufficient
submergence. For horizontal Francis Turbines, it is customary to choose the upper tip of the
runner blade as the reference elevation. Determining of the turbine setting is based
primarily on defining the plant sigma and choosing the vertical distance, the critical part of
the runner is from the minimum full load tail water level. Final selection of turbine setting will
8-4
be done by the turbine manufacturer in a manner similar to the selection of turbine size and
shape, using results from model tests. However, it is often useful to make preliminary
determination of the turbine setting elevation on the basis of the homologues nature of
turbines. For Jabori turbines, on the basis of past experience, curves and formulae have
been used for preliminary setting determination. The specific speed is used as a parameter
to characterize the value of plant sigma and experience curves that are used in determining
the setting elevation. Considering the existing operational data of the plant, at present the
turbine setting of the centerline is defined as 1 m below the minimum tail water level
(Figure-8.5). Calculations for Plant sigma and Turbines centerline setting have been given
in Annexure 8B
8.3.4 Turbine Main Components
The spiral-case of welded construction serves as inlet to the radial-oriented stay and guide
vanes, which are to convey the incoming water from axial to rotational flow.
A pressure relief valve on each spiral-case will be provided to limit the hydraulic transient
and the water hammer in upstream waterways.
The guide-vanes should be made of stainless steel and may be optionally covered with hard
ceramics. The guide-vane stems are supported by one lower and two upper self-lubricating
bearings, which should be capable of adjustment, exchange and maintenance without
dismantling the head cover or the bottom ring. The turbine is controlled by an electronic
governor, which transforms each electronic signal into a hydraulic action to be executed by
the hydraulic governor. For maintenance and commissioning purposes the governor can be
operated from the local control panel of the electronic governor, but under normal operation
it is remote controlled from the control room in the powerhouse or from any other place to
be designated.
Particularly, the long lasting conditions of part-load operation have to be considered

seriously and the runner designed to allow a continuous, fail safe operation without
increased vibration, noise and draft tube pressure pulsations as well as free of cavitational
potential.
The runner is a welded fabrication of high alloy steel made-up of pre-fabricated cast or
forged blades and rings.
8.3.5 Governor Type
8.3.5.1 Electronic Equipment
In recent years, the advent of the microprocessor has changed the design of the electronic
governors from analogue to digital systems with much more effective man-machine
interfaces. The electronic governor control provides functions such as turbine start / stop,
auto-frequency control and automatic load control, and provides interface connections to a
main control and instrumentation system. Its monitoring functions include fault detection,
alarm annunciation and unit shutdown. The governor also provides facilities for manual
control of the turbine.
8-5
The electronic equipment has to be extremely reliable and the digital technology allows
continuous self-checking of system operation. As the parameters for each turbine are stored
within computer programs, there is no need for printed circuit boards to be pre-calibrated.
With a digital system all the data is stored either within memory circuits (EPROMS) or is
downloaded from a programming module or central computer. The governor is normally
designed to allow circuit modules to be replaced whilst the unit remains connected to the
grid. As the mean time between failures is usually in a number of years, a large stock of
spares is not usually required.
8.3.5.2 Hydraulic Systems
The main development in hydraulic systems over recent years has been a steady increase
in the operating pressure of the governor hydraulic systems. This change has been driven
by two factors; cost and size. As the system pressure is increased the cost of the hydraulic
system decreases due to reduction in its size. With increasing system pressure, the size of
guide vane servo-motors, oil pumps, oil piping and tanks decreases. The overall effect of an
increase in system pressure is a reduction in the turbine cost although there is some
increase in the governor cost. For very large turbines, the oil storage requirements at low
system pressures are very large and this has also encouraged the adoption of higher
pressures.
One further advantage of reducing the size of the hydraulic system is that more of the
equipment can be assembled and tested within the manufacturers works. This means that
site work can be limited to simply connecting a skid-mounted package containing low and
high pressure tanks, oil pumps, control valves, etc., to the turbine servomotors. The
reduction of site work shortens the installation time and also increases the reliability as
there is less opportunity for contamination of the system.
8.3.6 Inlet Valves
The Butterfly Type Inlet valve will be used to shut off water in case of turbine failure, to
relieve pressure on the turbine during shutdown and to permit dewatering the turbines. The
valves shall be opened by means of pumped hydraulic oil and held in the full open position
by means of a mechanical latching device. The valves are to be closed assisted by
counterweight. Diameter of the valve for each unit will be 750mm. The turbine hydraulic
governor system may also be used for the operation of valves hydraulic operation.
The valves are normally to be opened and closed under nearly balanced pressure with by-
pass valve open and wicket gates closed. However, the operating mechanism would have
sufficient capacity to close the valve under maximum discharge and pressure in an
emergency.
The inlet valve is of Butterfly type to economically accommodate the higher pressure and to
avoid obstruction in the waterway. The sizes and appurtenances including hydraulic
operators, extension pieces for connecting the valves with the penstock and turbine inlet by-
pass valve assemblies, and counterweights will be determined during final design stage.
8.3.7 Gate Equipment
8-6
Power intake structure is provided with 3.5m wide and 2.17 m high gate at power tunnel
inlet. Four bottom outlets and three under sluices have also been provided in the structure.
These outlets are provided with 3.0m by 3.0 and 1.5m by 2.0 m gates respectively. The
intake and bottom outlet gates are provided with motorized hoists to lower and lift the gates.
The undersluice gates are provided with manually operated screw winch machines. A
mobile crane has been provided to remove the gates for repairs when required.
The draft tube gates are provided with an electric hoist below the cantilever beam extending
downstream side of the powerhouse building as shown on drawings.
The structural parts of the gates and stop logs will be designed and fabricated in
accordance with criteria specified in ASTM, AISC, AWSD 1.1 and SSPC standards.
8.3.8 Flushing Section Equipment
The flushing section equipment comprises two vertical lift gates.
Two sets of stop logs are provided, one set for upstream isolation and the other set for
downstream isolation of the flushing section gate bay, for repair and maintenance of the
vertical lift flushing gate. Structural steel is to be used in fabrication of gates, stop logs and
welding pads embedded in first stage concrete. The embedded parts to be attached to the
welding pads consist of two sides - seal bearing and guide plates and side beam, all of
corrosion resisting steel.
The Contractor shall pay particular attention to seal joints, especially in corners, so that a
continuous line of contact is maintained. The seal corner joints shall be cut in one place and
vulcanized or glued to the lateral and frontal seals.
Stop log and valve seals shall be free of any defect. The seals must be made of synthetic
rubber, non reactive with grease or hydrocarbons.
The vertical lift gates will be provided with screw winch machines operate-able manually for
lifting and lowering the gates as required. The structural parts of the gates and stop logs will
be designed and fabricated in accordance with criteria specified in ASTM, AISC, AWSD 1.1,
FEM and SSPC standards.
8.3.9 Cranes and Hoists for Power Plant
Cranes and hoists form a basic necessity of any power plant not only during the erection
period but also during the operational life of the plant. The cranes are extensively used
during the plant erection period and the construction schedule of the Power station largely
depends upon the availability of the cranes to various contractors involved in the Project.
Keeping in view the importance of the cranes, the powerhouse is provided with an electric
overhead traveling crane 25/5 ton capacity that will cover all the needs of the station i.e.
unloading and installation of plant during the erection period as well as during its operational
life. A monorail Hoist will be provided to operate the Draft Tube gates.
In accordance with the latest practice, all the station cranes and hoists are to be designed
8-7
for standard industrial service as per the latest version of Crane Manufacturers Association
of America (CMMA) Specification No. 70, FEM, ISO, IEC and AGMA standards.
8.3.10 Miscellaneous Auxiliary Mechanical System
The Jabori power station is to be provided with all mechanical auxiliary systems required for
reliable operation of a modern hydropower station.
The mechanical auxiliaries envisaged for the feasibility-level design of the power station
comprise:
Unit cooling water system
Drainage and dewatering system
Heating, ventilating and air-conditioning system
Station water services
Fire protection system
Compressed air system
Oil handling system
Workshop Equipments
8.3.10.1 Unit Cooling Water System
Cooling water system is required to dissipate the heat energy produced during the operation
of the Turbine shaft as well as the Generators. The cooling water temperature is to be about
20oC.
A simple cooling system is proposed for Jabori HPP wherein the cooling water is directly
taken from draft tube or from upstream of inlet valve i.e. from penstock. This cooling water
will be discharged into the tailrace after completion of the cooling process. This system
does not require any additional equipment except the circulating pumps, filters and
interconnecting piping.
8.3.10.2 Drainage System
All power station drain water is to be collected in a drainage sump from where it will be
pumped out to the tailrace. Two submersible pumps with a capacity of 15 L/s each are
provided for this purpose. Each pump will serve as standby of the other in such a way that
the average running hours of both pumps will remain the same throughout the operational
life.
8.3.10.3 Dewatering System
Dewatering of the units is required on the following occasions:
8-8
Whenever any of the unit is stopped due to low discharge.
During scheduled maintenance.
Force Majeure/ Break down of one or both units.
For this purpose, a separate pumping system is proposed in the drainage and dewatering
pit along with necessary equipment i.e. valves, interconnecting pipes etc to ensure efficient
dewatering of the units.
8.3.10.4 Heating, ventilating and Air-conditioning System
The functions of the heating, ventilating and air conditioning system for the power house are
to:
Protect equipment and personnel from the extremes of ambient temperature.
Provide the required quantity of fresh outside air for ventilation.
Maintain adequate ventilation in the battery room to prevent explosive concentration

of hydrogen.
Maintain the battery room within a temperature range that will maximize the output
and life of the batteries.
Maintain low vacuum in the Battery Room at all times to prevent leakage of
hydrogen to the plant ambient.
Provide smoke control in conjunction with the powerhouse fire protection system.
8.3.10.5 System Description
The heating and ventilation systems will provide fresh outside air to the powerhouse at
various levels. These areas and the battery room will be ventilated by a forced air supply
system. Only the control room and offices will have an air conditioning system.
The powerhouse is provided with a forced recirculation /exhaust ventilation system to meet
the various temperatures and ventilation requirements. The system will bring in fresh air and
exhaust warm air continuously during summer. During winter the ventilation system will re-
circulate the powerhouse with supplemental makeup air to account for a small portion of air
that will be continuously exhausted from contaminated spaces. The ventilation system will
be modulated to regulate indoor temperatures. The powerhouse ventilation system consists
of fans providing at least four (4) air changes per hour of the total volume of the
powerhouse. Duct heaters are provided for cold weather operation.
The Battery Room is provided with a fan continuously exhausting room air directly to the
outside. Air conditioning of the control room and offices has been provided for operating
personnels comfort and for protection of the control equipment.
8.3.10.6 Station Water Services
Station water services include the supply of water to the staff offices, toilets, ablution area
8-9
and drinking water. Plumbing work along with a central storage overhead water tank and
two reciprocating water pumps are required for the fulfillment of this basic necessity.
Provision for the drinking water is subject to the quality of the groundwater.
Capacities of the pumps and Storage tanks is calculated depending upon the number of
staff required for the operation of the Jabori Power Plant.
8.3.10.7 Fire Protection System
Fire fighting water supply is to be drawn either from each penstock with back up from a
pumped system, from the tailrace or a gravity system with a fire fighting tank. The location
of the tank will be established during design stage.
8.3.10.8 Compressed Air System
Dual Air cooled service air compressor with a receiver is to provide service air for the power
station. Following equipments will draw air from the service air receiver tank:
Generator breaks
Turbine maintenance seals
Workshop hand tools.
8.3.10.9 Oil Handling System
A centralized oil handling and purification system has been provided in the power station.
The system will include two oil storage tanks; one for the storage of clean oil and the other
for dirty oil along with the piping system for supply of clean oil to the designated unit.
8.3.10.10 Workshop Equipments
A standard workshop with the facilities of the basic machine tools and machining operations
is provided to enable the staff for in-house maintenance of the power station. This workshop
includes the following equipments:
Vertical Drilling machine
Horizontal turntable with equipment for welding and thermal coating.
Horizontal precision lathe.
Hand Tools, i.e. air blower, hand drill machine and electric hammer.
Different tool kits
Steel work benches
Steel storage cabinets and racks
Manually operated trolley
8 - 10
B. Power Simulation
8.4 Simulation of Annual Energy Generation
River discharge data for Siran River at the proposed weir site has been generated through
correlation of the SHYDOs short term discharge data at Jabori with the long term data
available with SWHP, WAPDA at Phulra.
As described in the previous sections, 40 years of river discharge data has been analyzed
to evaluate the power potential of Jabori HPP. Ecological flows, mandatory for the area
lying downstream of the proposed weir, have been deducted from the estimated discharges
to obtain the Net Discharge available for the power generation. Distribution of Annual net
Flows indicates a mean annual discharge of 5.7 m3/sec at the proposed weir site. However,
a long interval of six years, starting from 1999 upto 2005, falls in the dry years category.
The annual power simulation for Jabori HPP reveals that the annual energy generation may
vary between 34.15 and 62.16 GWh with an average of 48.61 GWh which means that
annual energy generation varies between 70.24% and 127.86% of the mean annual
generation as shown in Table-8.2. Graphical presentation of simulation is shown in
Figure- 8.5.
Dry, average and wet year flows are those having average river flow with a probability of
exceedence of 85%, 50% and 15% respectively. Analysis reveals that 1985, 1969 and 1994
are dry, average and wet years with average river flows of 4.94 m3/sec, 5.86 m3/sec and
6.44 m3/sec respectively.
The available mean monthly energy and power generation around the year is shown in
Table8.3 for a selected dry, average and wet year for 40 years. During the period from
November to February, energy generation amounts to be 25.5 % of annual energy
generation in a dry year, 27.5% in average and 27.8% in a wet year.
Monthly variation of discharge during a year is also an important hydrological feature.

March, April and to some extent, may register higher flows, due to snowmelt while July
August register higher flows due to monsoon rainfalls in the catchment area. November,
December and January are the low flow months for Siran river. This period fortunately
happens o be the period of low power demand also.
Percent Annual Energy generation during the months of mean year is shown in Figure-8.6
which shows that energy generation is nearly the same in the period from March to August
when about 60 % of annual energy generation is realized at full load conditions, i.e. 33 % of
the time 60 % of annual energy would be produced. During this period the available power
would be in general above 5 MW. In the period from May to September about 67 % of the
annual energy would be produced.
During the period from October to February energy generation is low and amounts to 33 %
of the annual energy generation. For run-of-river operation the power plant is assumed
operational when the river flow available for power generation is equal to or above 50 % of
the maximum turbine design discharge.
8 - 11
Monthly Simulation of power plant operation reveals that one unit of power plant may not be
operated in November and December due to the fact that river flow equal to or above 50 %
of the maximum turbine discharge, i.e. 1.57 m3/ sec is not available for power generation.
From January to October both the power plants will be operational at full discharge and for
very short time one plant, at 50 % and above turbine design discharge, shall remain
operational.
Power plant operation is recommended for river discharge upto floods with a return period
of 100 years. For higher floods, it is strongly recommended to suspend operation and close
the power intake temporarily. Excessively high sediment concentrations are to be expected
which may cause excessive wear and tear in the waterway system and the turbine units.
8.5 Peak and Off Peak Hours Storage Volume
Reservoir volume has been estimated from topographic survey maps, prepared with
contour interval of 1 meter. Live storage has been estimated for various water levels from
1381 to 1383 masl at an increment of 1 m. Live storage will be used for daily 4 hours
peaking. To have a design discharge of 6.28 m3/s during 4 hours peaking, a live storage of
about 90,432 m3 would be required. At crest level of 1383 masl the storage has been
estimated as 98,882 m3 as shown in the attached Table-8.4.
Flows during 20 off peak hours will be stored to fill the live storage to provide additional
flows during 4 peak hours.
8.6 Reservoir Operation
In order to generate the power supply from Jabori HPP power plants, throughout the year,
Reservoir Operation is done on the basis of estimated 10 daily net flows of Siran river at
Jabori as shown in Table-8.5.
In this study a design discharge of 6.28 m3/s (Q 30 ) is utilized to generate the energy through
Jabori power plant. Two turbine units are housed in the Jabori Power House; each working
at design discharge of 3.14 m3/s.
In case of maximum supply/ availability of river discharge, both the units will run at their
maximum design discharges and will generate maximum power of 6.50 MW. But in case of
low flow season both the units will have to be adjusted so as to run with a minimum design
discharge of 1.57 m3/s or above. Major deficit may occur in the months of September,
December and to some extent in June when reservoir storage will be utilized to keep the
units in running position.
Table-8.5 gives detailed explanation about river discharges consumed, power and energy
generation, corresponding reservoir storage levels etc. for both the units on 10 daily net flow
basis for 24 hours working. According to reservoir operation studies the final out comes are
as follows:
Plant Size = 6.5 MW.
Design discharge = 6.28 m3/sec.
No. of Units = 2 Nos.
Annual energy = 40.701 GWh
Plant Factor = 71.04 %
8 - 12
TABLES
Table 8.1
Alternatives for Turbine Selection
Alternative 1
Turbine
Total Q Turbine
Exceedance Turbine Head Efficiency output
Flow Turbine output
(%) Operation H (m) Power
Q 5+1.28 Energy KWh
KW
5.00 A 114 0.920 4,506,462.86
10 6.28 6432.692
1.28 B 114 0.900 1,128,575.05
5.00 A 114 0.920 4,506,462.86
20 6.28 6432.692
1.28 B 114 0.900 1,128,575.05
6.28 5.00 A 114 0.920 4,506,462.86
30 6432.692
1.28 B 114 0.900 1,128,575.05
35 5.94 5.00 A 114 0.920 5144.364 2,253,231.43
40 5.66 5.00 A 114 0.920 5144.364 2,253,231.43
50 5.12 5.00 A 114 0.920 5144.364 4,506,462.86
60 4.68 4.68 A 114 0.920 4815.125 4,218,049.24
70 4.34 4.34 A 114 0.910 4416.772 3,869,092.27
80 4.00 4.00 A 114 0.910 4070.758 3,565,983.66
90 3.63 3.00 A 114 0.860 2885.317 2,527,537.87
100 1.75 1.28 B 114 0.900 2576.655 1,128,575.05
Turbine A = 5m3/sec, Turbine B = 1.28m3/sec Total 41,227,277.54
Alternative 2
Turbine
Total Q Turbine
Flow Turbine output
Q 4+2.28 Energy KWh
KW
4.00 A 114 0.920 3,605,170.29
10 6.28 6435.823
2.28 B 114 0.910 2,032,610.68
4.00 A 114 0.920 3,605,170.29
20 6.28 6435.823
2.28 B 114 0.910 2,032,610.68
4.00 A 114 0.920 3,605,170.29
30 6.28 6435.823
2.28 B 114 0.910 2,032,610.68
4.00 A 114 0.920 1,802,585.15
35 5.94 6089.809
1.94 B 114 0.910 864,751.04
4.00 A 114 0.920 1,802,585.15
40 5.66 5730.598
1.66 B 114 0.870 707,416.70
3.50 A 114 0.900 3,085,947.40
50 5.12 10270.387
1.62 B 114 0.890 1,412,482.21
60 4.68 4.00 A 114 0.920 4115.491 3,605,170.29
70 4.34 4.00 A 114 0.920 4115.491 3,605,170.29
80 4.00 4.00 A 114 0.920 4115.491 3,605,170.29
90 3.63 3.63 A 114 0.910 3694.213 3,236,130.17
100 1.75 1.75 B 114 0.890 3483.629 1,525,829.55
Turbine A = 4m3/sec, Turbine B = 2.28m3/sec Total 42,166,581.15
Alternative 3
Turbine
Exceed- Total Q Turbine
Turbine Head output
ance Flow Turbine Efficiency output
Operation H (m) Power
(%) Q 3x2 Energy KWh
KW
2.00 A 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
10 6.28 2.00 B 114 0.910 6106.136 1,782,991.83
2.00 C 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
2.00 A 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
20 6.28 2.00 B 114 0.910 6106.136 1,782,991.83
2.00 C 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
2.00 A 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
30 6.28 2.00 B 114 0.910 6106.136 1,782,991.83
2.00 C 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
2.00 A 114 0.910 891,495.91
35 5.94 2.00 B 114 0.910 4009.696 891,495.91
1.94 C 114 0.910 864,751.04
2.00 A 114 0.910 891,495.91
40 5.66 2.00 B 114 0.910 3706.179 891,495.91
1.66 C 114 0.900 731,810.38
2.00 A 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
50 5.12 2.00 B 114 0.910 3100.038 1,782,991.83
1.12 C 114 0.850 932,641.88
2.00 A 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
60 4.68 4070.758
2.00 B 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
2.00 A 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
70 4.34 4070.758
2.00 B 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
2.00 A 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
80 4.00 4070.758
2.00 B 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
2.00 A 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
90 3.63 3675.984
1.63 B 114 0.900 1,437,169.79
100 1.75 1.75 A 114 0.905 1771.171 1,551,545.77
Total 41,177,755.44
3 Turbines , each of 2 m3/s

Alternative 4
Turbine
Total Q Head Turbine
Exceedance Turbine Efficiency output
Flow Turbine H output
(%) Operation Power
Q 4+2 (m) Energy KWh
KW
4.00 A 114 0.920 3,605,170.29
10 6.28 6150.870
2.00 B 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
4.00 A 114 0.920 3,605,170.29
20 6.28 6150.870
2.00 B 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
4.00 A 114 0.920 3,605,170.29
30 6.28 6150.870
2.00 B 114 0.910 1,782,991.83
4.00 A 114 0.920 1,802,585.15
35 5.94 6068.113
1.94 B 114 0.900 855,248.28
4.00 A 114 0.920 1,802,585.15
40 5.66 5786.291
1.66 B 114 0.900 731,810.38
4.00 A 114 0.920 3,605,170.29
50 5.12 5180.151
1.12 B 114 0.850 932,641.88
60 4.68 4.00 A 114 0.920 4115.491 3,605,170.29
70 4.34 4.00 A 114 0.920 4115.491 3,605,170.29
80 4.00 4.00 A 114 0.920 4115.491 3,605,170.29
90 3.63 3.63 A 114 0.920 3734.808 3,271,692.04
100 1.75 1.75 B 114 0.905 3542.342 1,551,545.77
Turbine A = 4m3/s, Turbine B = 2 m3/s Total 41,533,276.17
Alternative 5
Turbine
(%) 3 Operation Power
Q 6 m /s (m) Energy KWh
KW
10 8.20 6.00 A 114 0.920 6173.237 5,407,755.44
20 7.09 6.00 A 114 0.920 6173.237 5,407,755.44
30 6.28 6.00 A 114 0.920 6173.237 5,407,755.44
35 5.94 5.94 A 114 0.920 3055.752 2,676,838.94
40 5.66 5.66 A 114 0.920 2911.710 2,550,657.98
50 5.12 5.12 A 114 0.910 5210.570 4,564,459.08
60 4.68 4.68 A 114 0.910 4762.786 4,172,200.88
70 4.34 4.34 A 114 0.890 4319.700 3,784,057.27
80 4.00 4.00 A 114 0.870 3891.823 3,409,237.12
90 3.63 3.63 A 114 0.850 3450.638 3,022,758.95
100 1.75 - 114 0 0 0.00
A = 6 m3/sec Turbine Total 40,403,476.54
Alternative 6
Turbine
(%) Operation Power
Q 3+3 (m) Energy KWh
KW
3.00 A 114 0.920 2,703,877.72
10 8.20 6173.237
3.00 B 114 0.920 2,703,877.72
3.00 A 114 0.920 2,703,877.72
20 7.09 6173.237
3.00 B 114 0.920 2,703,877.72
3.00 A 114 0.920 2,703,877.72
30 6.28 6173.237
3.00 B 114 0.920 2,703,877.72
3.00 A 114 0.920 1,351,938.86
35 5.94 6111.504
2.94 B 114 0.920 1,324,900.08
3.00 A 114 0.920 1,351,938.86
40 5.66 5823.420
2.66 B 114 0.920 1,198,719.12
3.00 A 114 0.920 2,703,877.72
50 5.12 5125.576
2.12 B 114 0.860 1,786,126.76
3.00 A 114 0.920 2,703,877.72
60 4.68 4589.667
1.68 B 114 0.800 1,316,670.89
3.00 A 114 0.920 2,703,877.72
70 4.34 3086.618
1.34 - 114 0.000 0.00
3.00 A 114 0.910 3053.068 2,674,487.74
80 4.00
1.00 - 114 0.000 0.000 0.00
90 3.63 3.00 A 114 0.920 3086.618 2,703,877.72
100 1.75 1.75 A 114 0.860 3366.203 1,474,397.09
A=3 m3/s , B= 3 m3/s Total 39,517,956.59
Alternative 7
Exceed Turbine Turbine
Total Q Turbine Turbine Head Efficienc
ance output output
Flow Q 3.14 + 3.14 Operation H (m) y
(%) Power KW Energy KWh
3.14 A 114 0.920 2,830,058.68
10 8.20 6461.321
3.14 B 114 0.920 2,830,058.68
3.14 A 114 0.920 2,830,058.68
20 7.09 6461.321
3.14 B 114 0.920 2,830,058.68
3.14 A 114 0.920 2,830,058.68
30 6.28 6461.321
3.14 B 114 0.920 2,830,058.68
35 5.94 3.14 A 114 0.920 3230.661 1,415,029.34
2.80 B 114 0.920 2880.844 1,261,809.60
40 5.66 3.14 A 114 0.920 3230.661 1,415,029.34
2.52 B 114 0.915 2578.668 1,129,456.75
50 5.12 3.14 A 114 0.920 3230.661 2,830,058.68
1.98 B 114 0.880 1948.596 1,706,969.76
60 4.68 3.14 A 114 0.920 3230.661 2,830,058.68
1.54 B 114 0.800 1377.795 1,206,948.31
70 4.34 3.14 A 114 0.920 3230.661 2,830,058.68
80 4.00 3.14 A 114 0.920 3230.661 2,830,058.68
90 3.63 3.14 A 114 0.920 3230.661 2,830,058.68
100 1.75 1.75 A 114 0.840 3287.920 1,440,108.78
3 3/
A= 3.14 m /s , B= 3.14 m s Total 40,705,997.35
Alternative 8
Turbine
Total Q Turbine
Flow Turbine output
Q 3.5 + 3.5 Energy KWh
KW
3.50 A 114 0.920 3,154,524.00
10 6.28 6430.231
2.78 B 114 0.910 2,478,358.64
3.50 A 114 0.920 3,154,524.00
20 6.28 6430.231
2.78 B 114 0.910 2,478,358.64
3.50 A 114 0.920 3,154,524.00
30 6.28 6430.231
2.78 B 114 0.910 2,478,358.64
35 5.94 3.50 A 114 0.920 3601.055 1,577,262.00
2.44 B 114 0.890 2428.587 1,063,721.17
40 5.66 3.50 A 114 0.920 3601.055 1,577,262.00
2.16 B 114 0.850 2053.272 899,333.24
50 5.12 3.50 A 114 0.920 3601.055 3,154,524.00
60 4.68 3.50 A 114 0.920 3601.055 3,154,524.00
70 4.34 3.50 A 114 0.920 3601.055 3,154,524.00
80 4.00 3.50 A 114 0.920 3601.055 3,154,524.00
90 3.63 3.50 A 114 0.910 3561.913 3,120,235.70
100 1.75 1.75 A 114 0.800 3131.352 1,371,532.18
Total 39,126,090.25
A = 3.5 m3/s, B = 3.5 m3/s
1 of 3
Table - 8.2
JABORI HYDROPOWER PROJECT - ENERGY ESTIMATION ON MONTHLY BASIS NET RIVER FLOW
Year 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982
Month Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy
GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh
Jan 3.10 3.05 2.32 3.11 3.63 2.81 2.56 3.30 3.79 3.67 3.38 3.31 2.85 2.44
Feb 4.12 3.14 2.91 3.37 4.17 3.06 3.50 4.24 3.27 3.60 3.33 4.21 3.39 3.04
Mar 5.51 5.05 3.86 5.36 6.37 4.27 4.87 5.53 3.83 5.35 4.96 5.63 6.13 5.33
Apr 5.30 4.46 3.94 5.41 5.51 4.14 5.06 6.32 4.79 5.31 5.82 5.64 6.44 5.39
May 4.95 3.49 3.17 5.37 4.55 3.48 4.71 5.46 4.68 4.97 4.67 4.65 5.09 5.56
Jun 3.56 2.50 4.77 3.76 3.73 2.98 3.59 4.41 4.49 3.89 3.34 4.32 3.25 4.09
Jul 3.82 3.90 4.26 3.84 4.54 4.37 4.77 6.49 8.10 6.18 4.51 4.48 4.84 4.53
Aug 5.12 5.10 5.04 4.64 5.21 4.22 7.06 7.51 5.61 7.22 3.81 4.59 5.10 6.01
Sep 3.29 5.87 3.35 3.66 3.59 3.02 4.49 4.26 4.65 4.23 3.07 3.54 2.77 2.64
Oct 4.17 3.93 2.65 3.14 3.33 2.70 3.28 3.99 4.65 3.64 2.86 3.06 3.34 3.34
Nov 3.37 2.55 2.67 2.73 2.59 2.01 2.75 3.14 3.54 3.69 2.76 2.66 2.53 3.24
Dec 2.79 2.54 2.57 3.06 2.75 2.63 3.04 3.08 3.44 3.33 2.58 2.79 2.43 3.26
49.09 45.60 41.49 47.46 49.97 39.69 49.69 57.73 54.85 55.08 45.08 48.89 48.16 48.89
2 of 3
Table - 8.2
Year 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Month Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy
GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh
Jan 3.24 2.68 3.36 3.15 3.51 3.23 3.43 3.44 5.03 4.62 3.99 3.07 3.40 3.20
Feb 2.97 2.65 2.91 3.52 3.85 3.35 2.77 4.48 5.99 4.47 3.94 3.61 3.46 3.92
Mar 5.55 4.31 3.49 5.98 6.23 5.72 3.85 6.08 7.38 6.38 6.54 5.19 5.37 6.95
Apr 6.02 4.95 4.03 5.82 5.96 5.01 4.88 5.84 7.50 6.20 5.50 6.32 5.92 5.83
May 5.85 3.85 3.48 5.24 5.44 4.01 5.24 5.35 6.46 5.74 4.94 5.20 5.13 5.15
Jun 4.23 2.94 2.28 4.32 4.38 2.60 3.36 3.58 4.98 4.43 4.04 3.90 3.97 4.45
Jul 4.59 3.99 5.28 4.69 3.93 7.53 5.47 4.59 5.64 5.88 6.79 6.51 7.37 4.45
Aug 5.32 5.51 4.67 5.64 4.18 6.42 5.49 5.76 4.99 5.13 3.84 6.18 6.14 5.45
Sep 4.56 4.51 2.68 3.47 3.06 3.88 3.36 4.08 4.88 7.68 3.99 3.63 3.52 3.27
Oct 3.19 3.08 2.96 3.26 5.82 3.13 3.30 3.36 3.44 4.43 2.86 3.66 3.12 3.56
Nov 2.59 2.78 2.41 4.21 3.14 2.58 2.83 2.85 2.72 3.73 3.26 2.99 2.74 2.47
Dec 2.67 2.97 3.71 4.36 3.26 3.05 3.06 5.13 2.88 3.47 2.65 3.81 3.15 2.99
50.77 44.22 41.25 53.65 52.76 50.51 47.04 54.55 61.89 62.16 52.34 54.09 53.29 51.68
127.86%
3 of 3
Table - 8.2
Year 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Percentage of
Month Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Annual Generation
GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh GWh
Jan 2.83 3.37 2.90 3.09 2.34 2.70 2.25 3.22 3.48 3.72 2.84 2.61 6.58
Feb 2.47 5.63 3.06 3.03 1.70 2.74 3.92 3.40 5.57 3.63 3.08 2.72 7.31
Mar 3.85 6.50 4.86 3.63 2.40 3.97 5.76 3.78 6.99 3.98 5.08 3.46 10.56
Apr 6.09 6.80 4.47 3.74 3.47 3.88 6.18 3.22 5.37 4.61 7.02 4.87 10.96
May 5.21 5.71 3.48 2.97 2.64 3.07 5.03 3.29 5.39 4.38 5.35 3.74 9.57
Jun 4.84 3.61 2.30 2.87 3.06 2.75 3.82 2.98 4.30 3.20 4.93 4.63 7.69
Jul 5.18 4.54 3.86 4.49 4.44 2.88 4.28 3.62 4.51 5.46 4.53 4.96 10.19
Aug 7.06 3.75 4.78 4.75 3.81 5.08 4.08 3.65 3.70 6.60 4.32 4.30 10.64
Sep 5.12 3.55 3.31 3.17 3.02 3.15 3.75 3.25 2.42 3.97 3.46 2.69 7.71
Oct 3.84 2.85 2.70 2.98 2.24 2.08 2.99 3.34 3.27 2.81 2.84 2.52 6.77
Nov 3.25 2.45 3.50 2.17 2.77 1.81 2.44 2.70 2.86 2.83 2.51 2.94 5.85
Dec 3.10 2.39 2.66 2.38 2.24 2.14 2.81 2.75 2.28 4.05 1.98 3.92 6.18
52.84 51.14 41.87 39.25 34.15 36.23 47.32 39.20 50.16 49.22 47.94 43.36 100.00
70.24%
Table - 8.3
Variation of Energy and Pewer for Hydrological Dry, Average and Wet Years of Plant
Operation.
ROR Mean Monthly Energy Mean Monthly Power

Month GWh MW
Jan 3.36 4.52
Feb 2.91 4.33
Mar 3.49 4.69
Apr 4.03 5.59
May 3.48 4.67
Jun 2.28 3.17
Jul 5.28 7.09
Aug 4.67 6.28
Sep 2.68 3.72
Oct 2.96 3.98
Nov 2.41 3.35
Dec 3.71 4.98
Total Annual Energy Generation 41.25 GWh in Dry Year (1985)
Month GWh MW
Jan 3.10 4.16
Feb 4.12 6.13
Mar 5.51 7.40
Apr 5.30 7.35
May 4.95 6.65
Jun 3.56 4.95
Jul 3.82 5.13
Aug 5.12 6.88
Sep 3.29 4.57
Oct 4.17 5.61
Nov 3.37 4.68
Dec 2.79 3.75
Total Annual Energy Generation 49.09 GWh in Average Year (1969)
Month GWh MW
Jan 3.07 4.13
Feb 3.61 5.38
Mar 5.19 6.97
Apr 6.32 8.78
May 5.20 6.99
Jun 3.90 5.42
Jul 6.51 8.76
Aug 6.18 8.31
Sep 3.63 5.04
Oct 3.66 4.92
Nov 2.99 4.15
Dec 3.81 5.13
Total Annual Energy Generation 54.09 GWh in Wet Year (1994)
*
ROR = Run of river
GWh = Giga Watt Hour
MW = Maga Watt.
Table - 8.4
Elevation Area Capacity Relationship for Weir Site of Jabori
Commulative Capacity
Elevation Area Avg. Area Volume
Live storage for
Total Live
power
(m) (m2) (m2) (m3) (m3) (m3) (m3)
1374 49 0 0 0
1375 1986 1017 1017 1017
1376 5016 3501 3501 4518
1377 9557 7286 7286 11805 0
1378 16493 13025 13025 24829 13025
1379 25248 20870 20870 45700 33895
1380 33771 29509 29509 75209 63404
1381 43438 38604 38604 113813 102009 0
1382 49482 46460 46460 160273 148469 46460
1383 55363 52422 52422 212696 200891 98882
1384 61111 58237 58237 270932 259128 157119
1385 68104 64608 64608 335540 323735 221727
1386 74768 71436 71436 406976 395171 293163
1387 81038 77903 77903 484879 473074 371065
1388 89265 85151 85151 570030 558225 456217
1389 96644 92954 92954 662984 651180 549171
1390 102936 99790 99790 762774 750970 648961
762774
Invert level of outlets = 1377m

Invert level of Intake = 1378m
Minimum operating level = 1381m; (1378+3)
Table - 8.5
Reservoir Operation
Total Inflow = Siran

Out Flow = maximum allowable discharge for power
Designed Discharge Q30 = 6.28 cumecs Q for unit 1 = 3.14 cumecs Q for unit 2 3.14 1.57 cumecs (Max. / Min.)
Lake Levels
Available Water Balance Gross Reservoir Storage
Power House Releases Corresponding to Power Generation Energy Generation
Water Discharges (For Storage) Position
Reservoir Storage
through Low
No. of No. of Level outlets
Power
Per- Siran Q for Operating Q for Operating /Spillway (+) Excess / (-) Max. Head
Month Tunnel Initial Final Initial Final Net Head Unit 1 Unit 2 Total Unit 1 Unit 2 Total
iod Inflows Unit 1 hours per Unit 2 hours per Deficit Head Losses
Discharge
day day
m3/ sec m3/ sec No. m3/ sec No. m3/ sec m3 m3 m3 m3 m m m m m MW MW MW GWH GWH GWH
I 6.07 3.14 24.00 2.93 24.00 6.07 0 0 212696 212696 1383.00 1383.00 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.51 5.20 0.65 0.60 1.249
July II 7.17 3.14 24.00 3.14 24.00 6.28 768960 0 212696 212696 1383.00 1383.00 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.69 5.38 0.65 0.65 1.292
III 7.62 3.14 24.00 3.14 24.00 6.28 1269332 0 212696 212696 1383.00 1383.00 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.69 5.38 0.71 0.71 1.421
I 7.80 3.14 24.00 3.14 24.00 6.28 1313379 0 212696 212696 1383.00 1383.00 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.69 5.38 0.65 0.65 1.292
Aug. II 7.11 3.14 24.00 3.14 24.00 6.28 714156 0 212696 212696 1383.00 1383.00 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.69 5.38 0.65 0.65 1.292
III 6.61 3.14 24.00 3.14 24.00 6.28 317438 0 212696 212696 1383.00 1383.00 126 6.04 120 3.25 3.25 6.50 0.86 0.86 1.717
I 5.98 3.14 24.00 2.90 24.00 6.04 0 -49904 212696 162792 1383.00 1382.05 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.49 5.18 0.65 0.60 1.242
Sep. II 5.38 3.14 24.00 2.27 24.00 5.41 0 -22766 162792 140026 1382.05 1381.56 126 6.04 120 2.69 1.95 4.64 0.65 0.47 1.113
III 4.90 3.14 24.00 1.78 24.00 4.92 0 -17837 140026 122188 1381.56 1381.18 126 6.04 120 2.69 1.53 4.22 0.65 0.37 1.012
I 4.78 3.14 24.00 1.64 24.00 4.78 0 0 122188 122188 1381.18 1381.18 126 6.04 120 2.69 1.41 4.10 0.65 0.34 0.984
Oct. II 4.75 3.14 24.00 1.61 24.00 4.75 0 0 122188 122188 1381.18 1381.18 126 6.04 120 2.69 1.38 4.07 0.65 0.33 0.976
III 4.45 1.57 24.00 2.88 24.00 4.45 0 0 122188 122188 1381.18 1381.18 126 6.04 120 1.35 2.47 3.82 0.36 0.65 1.007
I 4.23 1.57 24.00 2.66 24.00 4.23 0 0 122188 122188 1381.18 1381.18 126 6.04 120 1.35 2.28 3.63 0.32 0.55 0.870
Nov. II 4.20 1.57 24.00 2.63 24.00 4.20 0 0 122188 122188 1381.18 1381.18 126 6.04 120 1.35 2.25 3.60 0.32 0.54 0.864
III 4.02 0.00 24.00 0.00 24.00 0.00 3382553 90507 122188 212696 1381.18 1383.00 126 126 Annual Shutdown for 10 Days 0.000
I 4.18 1.57 24.00 2.65 24.00 4.22 0 -35525 212696 177170 1383.00 1382.32 126 6.04 120 1.35 2.27 3.62 0.32 0.55 0.868
Dec. II 4.18 1.57 24.00 2.65 24.00 4.22 0 -36989 177170 140182 1382.32 1381.57 126 6.04 120 1.35 2.27 3.62 0.32 0.55 0.868
III 4.30 1.57 24.00 2.75 24.00 4.32 0 -14935 140182 125247 1381.57 1381.25 126 6.04 120 1.35 2.36 3.70 0.36 0.62 0.977
I 4.40 1.57 24.00 2.83 24.00 4.40 0 0 125247 125247 1381.25 1381.25 126 6.04 120 1.35 2.43 3.77 0.32 0.58 0.905
Jan. II 4.43 1.57 24.00 2.86 24.00 4.43 0 0 125247 125247 1381.25 1381.25 126 6.04 120 1.35 2.45 3.79 0.32 0.59 0.911
III 5.02 3.14 24.00 1.88 24.00 5.02 0 0 125247 125247 1381.25 1381.25 126 6.04 120 2.69 1.61 4.30 0.71 0.43 1.136
Table - 8.5
Reservoir Operation
Total Inflow = Siran

Out Flow = maximum allowable discharge for power
Designed Discharge Q30 = 6.28 cumecs Q for unit 1 = 3.14 cumecs Q for unit 2 3.14 1.57 cumecs (Max. / Min.)
Lake Levels
Available Water Balance Gross Reservoir Storage
Power House Releases Corresponding to Power Generation Energy Generation
Water Discharges (For Storage) Position
Reservoir Storage
through Low
No. of No. of Level outlets
Power
Per- Siran Q for Operating Q for Operating /Spillway (+) Excess / (-) Max. Head
Month Tunnel Initial Final Initial Final Net Head Unit 1 Unit 2 Total Unit 1 Unit 2 Total
iod Inflows Unit 1 hours per Unit 2 hours per Deficit Head Losses
Discharge
day day
m3/ sec m3/ sec No. m3/ sec No. m3/ sec m3 m3 m3 m3 m m m m m MW MW MW GWH GWH GWH
I 5.04 3.14 24.00 1.90 24.00 5.04 0 0 125247 125247 1381.25 1381.25 126 6.04 120 2.69 1.63 4.32 0.65 0.39 1.037
Feb. II 5.71 3.14 24.00 2.57 24.00 5.71 0 0 125247 125247 1381.25 1381.25 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.20 4.89 0.65 0.53 1.174
III 5.90 3.14 24.00 2.76 24.00 5.90 0 0 125247 125247 1381.25 1381.25 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.37 5.06 0.52 0.45 0.971
I 6.42 3.14 24.00 3.14 24.00 6.28 34914 87449 125247 212696 1381.25 1383.00 126 6.04 120 3.25 3.25 6.50 0.78 0.78 1.560
Mar. II 7.52 3.14 24.00 3.14 24.00 6.28 1069049 0 212696 212696 1383.00 1383.00 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.69 5.38 0.65 0.65 1.292
III 8.15 3.14 24.00 3.14 24.00 6.28 1775134 0 212696 212696 1383.00 1383.00 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.69 5.38 0.71 0.71 1.421
I 7.97 3.14 24.00 3.14 24.00 6.28 1461802 0 212696 212696 1383.00 1383.00 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.69 5.38 0.65 0.65 1.292
April II 7.89 3.14 24.00 3.14 24.00 6.28 1392749 0 212696 212696 1383.00 1383.00 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.69 5.38 0.65 0.65 1.292
III 7.77 3.14 24.00 3.14 24.00 6.28 1285670 0 212696 212696 1383.00 1383.00 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.69 5.38 0.65 0.65 1.292
I 7.33 3.14 24.00 3.14 24.00 6.28 903789 0 212696 212696 1383.00 1383.00 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.69 5.38 0.65 0.65 1.292
May II 6.72 3.14 24.00 3.14 24.00 6.28 379116 0 212696 212696 1383.00 1383.00 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.69 5.38 0.65 0.65 1.292
III 6.30 3.14 24.00 3.14 24.00 6.28 16685 0 212696 212696 1383.00 1383.00 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.69 5.38 0.71 0.71 1.421
I 5.73 3.14 24.00 2.64 24.00 5.78 0 -43101 212696 169595 1383.00 1382.18 126 6.04 120 2.69 2.26 4.95 0.65 0.54 1.189
June II 5.27 3.14 24.00 2.17 24.00 5.31 0 -30245 169595 139350 1382.18 1381.55 126 6.04 120 2.69 1.86 4.55 0.65 0.45 1.092
III 5.38 3.14 24.00 2.15 24.00 5.29 0 73325 139350 212676 1381.55 1383.00 126 6.04 120 2.69 1.85 4.54 0.65 0.44 1.089
0.00 turbines operating at full capacity for full day Total Energy Generation (GWH) 40.701
0.00 turbines not operating at full capacity maximum installed 3.25 3.25
0.00 turbines closed for full day 6.50

FIGURES
Jabori
Hydropower
Project-
Region of
Francis
Turbines
Figure 8.1
Figure 8.2
Figure 8.3
Efficiency curve of Jabori HPP Turbines with flow capacity

3.14m3/s
(TurbNpro Version 3)
Figure-8.5
Variation of Annual Energy Generation on Basis of Net Monthly flows (1969-2008)
70
60
50
Annual Energy - GWh
40
30
20
10
0
1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007
Years
Figure-8.6
Percent Annual Energy Generation on Basis of Net Monthly Flows (1969-2008)
12
10.96
10.56 10.64
10.19
10 9.57
Percent of Annual Energy Generation
8 7.69 7.71
7.31
6.77
6.58
6.18
5.85
6
0
Months
Figure - 8.7
Reservoir Volume Curve
1395
1390
1385
Elevation( m)
1380
1375
1370
0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 700,000 800,000 900,000
Volume (1000 m3)

CHAPTER
9
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT STUDIES

Jabori Hydropower Project - Final Feasibility Report Chapter - 9
CHAPTER - 9
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT STUDIES
9.1 General
This chapter presents a general description of the design criteria and the electrical
equipment requirements in order to define and establish the basis for electrical design and
to achieve a safe, economical, efficient and reliable electrical system for Jabori hydropower
station. In addition, the basic data, electrical assumptions, codes and standards, analysis
guidelines and other general technical requirements for the design of the electrical
equipments and systems are included herein.
The reservoir simulation and power generation studies indicate installed capacity of 6.5 MW
for the power plant. The equipment discussed in this section has been selected based on
this installed capacity for turbine units.
Layouts and designs developed using the criteria presented in this chapter has been used
during this feasibility phase to prepare preliminary designs and the construction cost
estimate for the project. During the future phases of project development, this criterion will
form the basis for the design activities.
9.2 Major Equipments
The most important components of the main electrical equipment are the 11 KV
synchronous generator of matching capacity each with the proposed turbines output,
connected to three phase step up transformer with 132 KV secondary voltages and an
outdoor 132 KV switchyard for connection to outgoing 132 KV transmission line. Single line
diagram (Figure-9.1) indicates the arrangement of main equipment.
The following electrical equipment and systems are proposed for electrical design:
Generators
Excitation System
Medium Voltage Switchgear
Bus Ducts and Connections
Unit and Station Service Transformer
Lighting
Protective Relaying
Main Power Transformer
Unit Automation and Control
Cables and Raceway System
DC and UPS System
9-1
Grounding System etc
9.3 Reference
All electrical equipments and systems are proposed to be designed in accordance with the
latest editions and amendments of codes and standards of the following institutions.
IEC International Electro-technical Commission
DIN Deutsche Industries Norman
IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
NEMA National Electrical Manufacturers Association
ICEA Insulated Cable Engineers Association
ANSI American National Standards Institute
ASTM American Society for Testing Materials
9.3.1 Codes and Standards
As a general rule, all electrical equipment is to comply with the applicable International
Electro-technical Commission (IEC) publications. In cases where relevant publications dont
exist, other internationally recognized standards may be applied. For lighting and small
power, the local Pakistani standards are to prevail. Mainly the following standards/
regulations are applicable for the Electrical Equipment:
Standards and Regulations
IEC 34 Rotating Machines
IEC 185 Current Transformers
IEC 186 Potential Transformers
IEC 76 Step-up Power Transformers
IEC 56 HV Circuit Breakers (above 1 KV)
IEC 60 HV Tests Techniques
IEEC 115 Tests
9.4 General Electrical Design Criteria
The general electrical design criteria, which has been used to establish for electrical design
of the electrical equipment and systems is described below:
9.4.1 Voltage Consideration
The IEC standard defines three voltage classes:
Low voltages are used to supply utilization equipment and are 1 KV or less.
9-2
Medium voltages are used as the primary distribution voltages to be used to feed the
primary winding of the step-down transformers to provide low-voltage systems.
These voltages are greater than 1 KV but less than 36 KV.
High voltages are used to transmit large amount of electrical power between
transmission substations, and are all voltages higher than 36 KV.
9.4.2 DC Source Requirements for Controls
The following DC systems are proposed:
For protection and Switchgear control, DC operating mechanism and motors 220 V
DC.
For essential services, 230 V AC from UPS.
For communication system, 48 V DC
For Instrumentation, 24 V DC locally derived.
9.4.3 AC Source Requirements for Unit and Station Services
Load requiring 3 phase power 415/230 V, 3-Phase, 4-wire, 50 HZ, earthed neutral
Load requiring 1 phase power 230 V, 2-wire (one wire earthed), 50 HZ.
9.4.4 Protection and Coordination Philosophy
The primary objective of the electrical system protection and coordination is to prevent
injury to personnel and to minimize damage to the system components. The protection level
is proposed to be achieved with the help of detection devices like relays and instruments
and interruption devices like fuses and circuit breakers.
Coordinating philosophy will select and set each protective device so as to minimize the
portion of the electrical system affected by a fault. Full selectivity is to be designed to fulfill
the following requirements:
Routine currents spikes must not cause disconnection:
When operating properly, only the primary protective device nearest to the fault in
the supply direction must respond.
If the device fails, the backup device next to it in the direction of power flow must
respond.
9.4.5 Electrical Equipment Location
Major Electrical equipments such as transformers, switchgear assemblies, switchboards,

and motor control centers are proposed to be installed in dedicated rooms, buildings or
other areas. Smaller equipment such as individual motor starters and panel boards will be
installed in the spaces that are ventilated and dry. All equipment rated above 600 volts,
except pad mounted transformers and metal enclosed outdoor switchgear assemblies, will
9-3
be located in dedicated spaces that are only accessible to qualified persons. Rooms
containing motor control centers are kept ventilated, not air-conditioned.
9.5 Electrical Generators
9.5.1 General Considerations
Based on the hydraulic data relating to Jabori Hydropower Project; Net Head of 114m and
Rated Discharge of 3.14 Cumecs, the total worked out rated output of the Jabori
hydropower plant will be 6.5 MW. There will be a total of two (2) generators having capacity
4 MVA each at 11 KV, 50 Hz with 0.85 power factor.
9.5.2 Generator Design Particulars
The proposed generators are to be designed, constructed and tested in accordance with
IEC Publications No. 34 and other relevant parts dealing with rotating electrical machines.
These generators are suitable and their appurtenances are to be designed for fully
automatic start-stop, unattended supervisory controlled operation.
The rotating parts of the proposed generators will be able to withstand the stresses at
runaway speed for two minutes. The maximum unit stresses for any rotating part of
generator or other shaft driven auxiliary machine at runaway speed will not exceed 2/3 of
the respective material yield strength.
9.5.3 Types and Rating
The proposed generators are horizontal-shaft, hydraulic driven, alternating current,

synchronous type, and will conform to the applicable standards regarding rating,
characteristic, tests, etc. The selection of generators is in accordance with the turbines
proposed by the Mechanical Section. The rating of the generators will be as follows:
Generator - 1
Operating duty Continuous
Rated Capacity 4 MVA
Efficiency 98 %
Power factor 0.85
Frequency 50 Hz
Number of Phases 3
Rated voltage 11 kV
Rated Current 210.5 Amp
Rated Speed 750 rpm
9-4
Armature Winding Star Connected
IEC Insulation F - Class
Generator - 2
Operating duty Continuous
Efficiency 98 %
Rated Capacity 4 MVA
Power factor 0.85
Frequency 50 Hz
Number of Phases 3
Rated voltage 11 kV
Rated Current 210.5 Amp
Rated Speed 750 rpm
Armature Winding Star Connected
Insulation Class F
9.5.4 Generator Output
Generator output will be matched with the maximum output of the selected turbine with
generating voltage of 11 KV and power factor of 0.85. Two turbines of equal capacities of
3.24 MW each with efficiency of 92.3 % have been specified. Generators of 4 MVA at 0.85
power factor ratings, having efficiency of 98 % coupled with the turbines have been
proposed.
9.5.5 Cooling System of Generators
Each generator will be provided with a closed circuit ventilation system complete with
surface coolers. Circulation of cooling air through the unit shall be accomplished without the
use of auxiliary fans.
The surface coolers are of the straight-tube type with radiating fans fastened securely to the
tubes to provide adequate thermal conductivity and maintain the efficiency of such
conductivity during the life of the surface coolers.
9.6 Excitation and Voltage Regulation System
9.6.1 Excitation System
The proposed excitation system is static type. The excitation current is controlled by a static
automatic voltage regulator (AVR), which will be equipped with the normal feed back and
control facilities including follow up manual control.
9-5
The generator field would be fed through Thyristor bridges controlled by an automatic
voltage regulator. The input to the Thyristor Bridge will be AC fed from terminal mounted
excitation transformers. The voltage regulator will hold the voltage within a bond of 0.5 %
and will incorporate reactance compensation, under excited reactive ampere limit circuits
and power system stabilizers.
9.6.2 Excitation Transformer
The proposed excitation transformers are dry-insulated type, three phase, complete in all
respects including all necessary accessories and spares. These transformers are
connected to the tap-off of isolated bus bars of the generator / transformer. For both 4 MVA
generators, the proposed excitation transformers are of 100 KVA each. Technical
requirements for these transformers are as follows:
Rated Capacity 100 KVA
No. of Phases 3
No load voltage HV side 11 kV
Standards Basically IEC
Frequency 50 Hz
Cooling Air Natural (AN)
9.6.3 Voltage Regulation
The generator is envisaged to have a state-of-the-art static excitation system with a digital
Automatic Voltage Regulator (AVR).
The voltage regulator forms part of the excitation system. Its primary task is to maintain the
voltage of the power system and the transient stability in the network. An additional task is
to protect the generator against thermal strain in its windings and iron. The regulator shall
have the following functions:
Voltage regulation
Field current regulation
Field current limiter
Reaction compensation
Supervision and Logic Circuits
Following line voltage during synchronizing
Under excitation limiter
Stator current limiter
9-6
Power system stabilizer
Power factor regulator
Active compensation
The equipment will be powered from 110 V DC station battery via a DC/AC converter if
needed.
9.7 Main Step Up Transformer
For changing the generator voltage to transmission voltage level, step up power transformer
with suitable capacity will be used. For the feasibility design level, one No. of three phase
transformer of capacity rating 10 / 13 MVA (Standard Units), matching with the generators
output is proposed. The transformer voltage ratio has been chosen to match the generator
voltage finally adapted as 11 KV. The generator side of the transformers will be connected
in delta formation and HV side in star formation. The proposed transformer having an off
load manual tap changing capability of + 5% to -7.5% in 2.5% steps.
9.7.1 Main Data for Transformers
One three-phase, step up transformer and two Auxiliary transformers of following ratings
are proposed:
Item Unit Main Auxiliary 1Auxiliary 2

Function Step-up Powerhouse Powerhouse
Rated output MVA 10 / 13 0.2 0.2
Rated voltage
1. Primary KV 11 11 11
2. Secondary KV 132 0.4 / 0.22 0.4 / 0.22
Frequency Hz 50 50 50
Temperature rise Co 55 55 55
Tap changer Off-load Off-load Off-load
Vector group YN d11 Dyn 11 Dyn 11
Impedance % 8.0 4.0 4.0
Cooling ONAN ONAN ONAN
9.7.2 Overload Requirements
The overload rating and protection will be in accordance with IEC 345. The overload
capability of any ancillary equipment such as bushings, CTs, oil expansion tanks, leads etc.
will not be less than the transformer overloads rating. The proposed transformers will also
be capable of withstanding, without injury, a voltage of 30% greater than the rated generator
voltage, when the generator full load is rejected.
9.7.3 Short Circuit Capability
The proposed transformers and its accessories will be capable of withstanding mechanical
and thermal stresses caused by short circuit fault currents without mechanical deformation
9-7
or impairing electrical capabilities. The sudden pressure relay and other alarm initiating
devices will not respond to the effect of the through fault short circuit current.
9.7.4 Buchholz Relay
Each transformer will be equipped with a Buchholz Relay of earthquake proof design.
These relays will be mounted in the pipe connecting the conservator tank to the main
transformer tank. The relay is to provide two contacts, one for alarm circuit and other for
shutdown circuit.
9.7.5 Cooling System and Requirement
The cooling system is ONAN (Oil Natural Air Natural). The cooling equipment of each
transformer will be furnished complete in every respect and will include radiator, fans,
piping, valves, motor contactors, relays, control equipment and all supplementary
equipment required for the function of the cooling system. Coolers, fans etc. will be
mounted on the tank walls.
9.8 Auxiliary Systems
The auxiliary system in a power plant is essential for the power plants successful operation.
Auxiliary system will include the following:
Unit cooling water system
Drainage and dewatering system
Heating, ventilation and air-conditioning system
Station water services
Fire protection system
Compressed air system
Oil handling system
Workshop Equipment
The auxiliary power supply system must be reliable and economical. There are several
methods of obtaining normal and supply power supplies for the auxiliary power requirement.
The generator circuit breaker scheme is preferable and is being used now a days in most of
the power stations instead of the conventional station transformers scheme. The proposed
auxiliary system is indicated in Figure-9.2.
9.8.1 Auxiliary Station Transformer
In order to avoid frequent outage of the units in case of expected faults occurring on the
colony transformer and to provide backup protection to 11 KV bus bar as well as to
accommodate the 11 KV intake feeder in the switchyard, an intermittent 11 / 11 KV
9-8
transformer with Star - Delta winding, equipped with necessary protection equipment of
required capacity has been proposed in the switch yard of the power house.
Two Nos. of auxiliary transformers have been proposed for providing the continuous electric
power for the operation of the auxiliary equipment in the powerhouse. The proposed
transformers are dry type and located in the powerhouse building at different floors. The
proposed auxiliary transformers ratings for both generators of capacity 4 MVA are of 200
KVA each.
9.8.2 Station Colony Transformer
One separate 200 KVA transformer having voltage ratio 11 / 0.4 / 0.22 KV has been
proposed for the colony supply and outdoor / external lighting to protect the generators from
incoming transients / over voltages from the fault etc. The transformer rating has been
calculated on the assessment of residential and commercial load of the colony.
9.8.3 11 KV (Medium Voltage) Supply System
The primary purpose of the 11 KV switchgear is to supply auxiliary power for the power
plant. 11 kV switchgear (board) shall be located in a separate room in the powerhouse and
will be tapped from generator output bus system. The 11 KV board shall be connected to
auxiliary power transformer through power cables to provide electric power to unit boards,
essential services board, common services board, switchyard & gate operation services and
DC supply etc.
These systems are recommended to be equipped with modern fuse disconnector switches
and circuit breakers of SF 6 or Vacuum type enclosed in cubicles, thus providing high
personnel safety.
9.8.4 11 KV Circuit Breakers
The proposed three phase 11 KV circuit breakers are of single throw and fully withdraw able
to isolate them for the maintenance purposes. The proposed circuit breakers are SF 6 gas
filled or the vacuum type.
Following 11 KV circuit breakers are proposed:
Nominal voltage 11 kV
Frequency 50 Hz
No. of Phases 3
Short circuit breaking current 12.5 kA
Short circuit making current 32 kA
Voltage and insulation 12 kV
Power frequency withstand voltage 36 kV
9-9
Lighting impulse withstand voltage 95 kV
Current rating 400 A
The complete 11 KV switchgear shall consist of the following:
Two Breakers for generators
One Breaker for Main Step-up transformer
Two Breakers for 132 KV Bus bar
9.8.5 Low Voltage AC Supply
The low voltage AC distribution is proposed to design as 415 V, 3 phase four wire plus earth
system. Normally, the power station will have the auxiliary supply transformers for each unit
auxiliary boards. The standby diesel generating sets provided for emergency requirement
will automatically start and supply to essential equipment during the failure of station power
supply.
9.8.6 Emergency Diesel Generator Set
In case of a breakdown of the WAPDA system simultaneous with a failure or standstill of all
hydro generators, a diesel generator of 250 KW is proposed to be installed at the
powerhouse to take over the supply to a certain group of equipment to ensure and facilitate
a safe shutdown or black start up. This Diesel Generator will be synchronous, rotating field
type with rotating brushless exciter controlled by a solid state voltage regulator.
9.8.7 DC Supply and UPS System
DC system has been provided to supply uninterruptible power for control of protective and
instrumentation equipment, other equipment specific controls and to power critical DC
operated equipment. An uninterruptible AC system has been provided to supply
uninterrupted, transient free regulated AC power during all normal and abnormal plant
operating conditions to specific critical AC loads.
For control and protecting equipment and for providing emergency lighting, in case of AC
power failure, a bank of sealed lead acid battery will be used for DC power supply system in
the power plant. Voltage level of this system will be 220 V for control, emergency lighting,
closing and opening of circuit breakers and 48 V will be used for communication system.
The outgoing of battery bank will be connected to DC panel and protection and control
equipment. Over load and short circuit current protection devices will be considered for all
circuits. Two chargers will be considered for charging of batteries and also for supplying DC
power to protection and control equipment. The power supply of battery chargers will be
380/220 V AC. The capacity of battery bank and chargers will be determined at next stage.
The battery system is to provide a safe and reliable supply of power and control voltage to
all primary functions. The system is independent of all other power systems and ensures
reliable execution of the control functions, both for normal operation and during possible
9 - 10
fault conditions. The use of AC / DC converters may be necessary for instruments,

protective devices and computer interfaces.
9.8.8 Power Supply to Gates at the Weir
Power supply for the operation of spillway gates and intake gates, located at a distance of 3
to 4 Kms, will be provided from the power station. For this purpose 11 KV overhead line
from power station to spillway and intake structures, is proposed. A separate transformer of
100 KVA is proposed to supply intake site. The communication will be provided by a
separate aerial cable mounted on the same poles.
9.8.9 Lighting and Small Power
Adequate indoor and outdoor lighting with illumination levels in accordance with recognized
standards has been foreseen. Inside the powerhouse, an emergency lighting system
powered from the station battery should be installed; the system shall operate through
automatic AC / DC change over switch in case of normal supply failure.
AC lighting and small power socket outlets, for 230V, shall be single-phase, connected
between phase and neutral of the 400V system. Under normal conditions, both the
emergency and normal lighting will be in operation. These two systems are proposed to
have totally separate circuits with power supply as follows:
Normal lighting: Powered from Unit Auxiliary Boards
Emergency lighting: Powered from 415 V essential supply switchgear
It is recommended that the normal lighting system shall be designed according to the
following design criteria:
Type of Area Illumination level
Outdoor:
Areas with common staff traffic & streetlights 50 Lux
Switchyard perimeter light 50 Lux
Switchyard inside area 50 Lux
Indoor:
Offices, control rooms, switchgear rooms 400 Lux
Storage rooms, corridors, etc. 100 Lux
Equipment rooms 200 Lux
Machine hall, etc 300 Lux
Workshop 300 Lux
9 - 11
The illumination requirement for the emergency lighting is at least 50 Lux all over the related
areas. Exit lights shall be installed above doors, staircases, etc. During blackouts these
shall be powered from their internal batteries for minimum 15 minutes.
9.9 Control and Protection Systems
9.9.1 Control System
(i) Power Plant Control System (PCS)
The PCS are proposed to design for installation in an air conditioned room. However, the
equipment shall withstand being operated occasionally with the air-conditioning system out
of operation.
The protection relays shall be part of each relevant Local Control Unit but operationally
independent of the local computer.
(ii) The Plant Control Level
A computerized PCS shall be provided to allow overall control and monitoring of the power
plant. However, no failure in the PCS shall interrupt the operation of the power plant. The
operation of the system shall be carried out from the plant control room where the Local
Control Cubicles (LCCs) and PCS control the entire process, including start up procedures,
automatic control procedures, interlocking routines, etc. Normally, the LCC manual control
panel will be disconnected but all LCC indications shall remain active.
Basic design requirements:
Data acquisition from all LCCs, including status signals, alarms, analogous
measurements, etc.
Determining and supervising the plant operation strategy
Time synchronization and time tagging system `
Post mortem review
Self-diagnoses and virus protection etc.
Software for system configuration and maintenance
(iii) The Local Control Level
These four local control cubicles are proposed:
One for generating unit 1 (LCC 1)
One for generating unit 2 (LCC 2)
One for the auxiliary systems, (LCC 3)
One for the 132 KV switchyard, (LCC 4)
9 - 12
(iv) Manual Control
Manual operation can be performed directly on the equipment, i.e. on the generating units;
switchgear panels, motor control cubicles (MCC) etc., and all monitoring and control must
then be done locally from the LCU mimic panel. The design of the local control panels must
include equipment for indicating status and control of major parts such as generator,
turbine, breakers, switches, control of alarm level set-points, etc. Start, stop and other
control of the generating units must be possible by manual operation.
(v) Control Room Equipment
The main components of control room equipment comprise the following:
Power control desk for control and indications of the generators, transformers and
switchgear along with a mimic display behind the desk, with indicators showing the
position of circuit breakers, disconnect switches and earth switches, etc.
Hydraulic control desk which will accommodate all hydraulic controls and indications
for the turbines and all gate equipment and tailrace levels.
One sequential events recorder.
One Synchronizing Panel
Main grouped alarms shall be annunciated on their respective control panels in the
powerhouse control room with the detailed alarms being annunciated on a local panel.
(vi) Supply System
The PCS has been supplied by 230 V AC via a DC/AC converter. 220V battery supply must
also be available as supply of the PCS equipment.
9.9.2 Protection System
(i) Protection Relays
Protection relays and circuit breaker shall be provided to prevent or limit damage during
faults or overloads and to minimize their effect on the remainder of the system. The system
shall be divided into protective zones separated by circuit breakers. These zones may be
divided into four classes:
1 Generator
2 Bus
3 Transformer
4 Line
During a fault the zone, which includes the faulted apparatus, shall be de-energized and
disconnected from the system.
9 - 13
The functioning of the protection relays shall not depend on the control system. The relays
are to be organized in two groups so that one group provides back-up protection for the
other group.
Auxiliary power shall be taken from the 220 V DC system only. Separate circuits shall serve
the two groups of relays in order to obtain maximum reliability. The relays shall be capable
of operation properly with voltage variations of 20% to +10%. Figure-9.3 indicate general
layout of plant protection system.
(ii) Generator Protection
The generator protection shall consist of:
Over/under voltage relay
Over/Under frequency relay
Over current/short circuit relay
Differential relay
Reverse power relay
Negative sequence current relay
Loss of excitation relays (Minimum reactance relay)
Shaft current relay
Rotor (field winding) earth fault relay
Three phase generator differential current relay
Excitation transformer over-current relay
Stator earth fault relay
Rotational speed relay
Vibration and shaft movement supervision relay
Winding thermal relay etc
(iii) Unit Protection
The following protection functions will be provided for the generator and main power
transformer:
21G Back up impedance protection
24G Volts per Hz protection
26T Main transformer oil temperature protection
32G Reverse Power protection
40G Loss of Excitation protection
49T Main transformer over temperature protection
9 - 14
63BT Main transformer Buchholz protection
87GT Generator and main transformer differential protection
46G Negative phase sequence protection
49S Stator over current protection
64S Stator earth fault protection etc
(iv) Transmission Line Protection
The following protection functions will be provided
Three phase line differential protection relay (SIEMENS, ABB, AREVA) on both
ends
Three phase over current relay
Earth fault relay
Three phase fast re-closure relay
Synchro check relay
Directional over current protection
Auto re-closer etc
(v) Bus Bar Protection
The following protection functions will be provided
87BB Bus bar Protection
50BF Breaker failure Protection
9.10 Cables
9.10.1 Design for Cables
All cables and tests are recommended to be in accordance with the applicable IEC
standards and where applicable with the Pakistani standards. Cables will be selected
considering the following:
Cables will be specified as being suitable for underground and surface installation in
wet or dry locations as the application dictates.
Cable construction will be non-flame propagating.
Cable conductors will be copper.
Required power cables capacities will be determined on the basis of equipment

loads, conductor material, insulation thermal rating, type of installation, ambient
temperature, etc. Insulation levels will be selected on the basis of system voltage
and type of grounding.
9 - 15
Minimum allowable power conductor size will be selected so that the fault current
capability of the cable will not exceed.
Voltages drop in the circuit for power and control cables.
9.10.2 Medium Voltage Power Cables
15 KV rated (for application of 13.8KV) with 133% insulation level single conductor,
Jacketed and tray rated.
Conductor: Stranded bare annealed copper and extruded semi-conducting

insulation shield.
Insulation: Cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE) with a semi-conducting layer.
Shield: 0.125 mm uncoated copper tape with 12.5% overlap.
Jacket: PVC or chlorinated polyethylene
9.10.3 Low Voltage Power Cables (600 V and below)
600V class insulation has been provided for 400V and 230V circuits. Single or multiple
conductors for size 50 mm2 and above and all multi-conductor cables will be tray rated.
Conductor: Stranded bare annealed copper
Insulation: Frame retardant Cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE)
Jacket: Flame resistant PVC or chlorinated polyethylene
9.10.4 Control Cables
600V single or multiple conductors will be jacketed, flame retardant and tray rated.
Insulation: Frame retardant Cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE)
Jacket: Flame resistant PVC or chlorinated polyethylene
9.10.5 Instrumentation Cables
Type PLTC 300V.
Conductor: Stranded bare annealed copper single or multiple pairs or triads.
Insulation: Flame resistant PVC or equal.
Shield: Aluminum foil screen aluminum coated Mylar tape with tinned copper
drain wire over each pair or triad. Overall shields with drain wire will
be provided for multi-pair or multi-triad cables. All shields will be
grounded at one end only.
Jacket: Flame resistant PVC with ripcord or equal.
9 - 16
Color Code: Black and white in pairs, black, white and red in triads. White printed
numerically for group identification
9.10.6 Lighting Cables
600 V single conductors:
Insulation: Cross-linked polyethylene
Jacket: Nylon
9.11 Grounding System
The design of the earthing system generally follows the main requirements outlined in the
IEEE publication No 80, Guide for Safety in Substation Grounding. The main criteria for
the design of grounding system for the powerhouse and the switchyard is as outlined below:
Protect the personnel and public from dangerous potentials such as transferred
potentials, touch and step potentials and mesh potentials during both normal and
operating and maximum ground fault conditions.
Provide connection to ground for non-current carrying parts of the electrical

equipment and power equipment neutrals.
Facilitate clearing of ground faults through protective system.
Dissipate static charges and/or induced current from current carrying lines or parts
thereof that need to be worked on.
Dissipate lightning discharges.
9.11.1 System Description
The proposed grounding system is comprised of the following:
(i) Conductors
The conductors used for the station grounding mat and bonding system will be bare
stranded copper. All buried copper cable will be, if required, alloy coated (lead-tin or tin
coated to reduce the galvanic corrosion of the buried steel and cast iron piping). Above
ground and inside concrete, stranded copper cable will be used with or without the alloy
coatings. Low voltage grounding conductors will use green/yellow insulated or marked
equipment grounding or other approved methods for bonding.
(ii) Ground Rods
Ground rods will be made of copper-clad steel (Copper weld). For usual grounding
applications, 20 mm nominal rod diameter sizes will be used. The length will be usually 2.5
9 - 17
m or 3 m but if longer rods are required, sectional ground rods that can be joined together to
provide the required length will be used. Special soil conditioning and/or special electrodes
may be used in rocky areas.
(iii) Grounding Conductor Connection Materials and Techniques
The types of connections to be used in the installation of the grounding system will be
based on the following:
Underground Connections
Copper to Copper These connections will be made by the powder weld process.
Copper to Steel These connections will be made by the powder weld process.
Because of the dissimilarity of metals, the connections will be coated with material such as
Bitumastic or equal and copper cable will be taped for a minimum of two feet away from the
connection.
Above Ground Connections
Above ground accessible grounding conductor connections will be either bolted or made by
the powder weld process. Ground inserts and ground pigtails will be provided throughout
the powerhouse and switchyard to facilitate connection of all electrical equipment to the
powerhouse ground grid. All contact surfaces of bolted connections will be cleaned to bright
metal and coated with approved No-Oxide grease.
9.12 132 KV Switchgear
9.12.1 Selection of Switchgear Arrangement
For an above ground hydropower plant, the most cost effective design for switchyard is an
outdoor installation. Normally following four alternatives are possible
Single Circuit Breaker System
Single Circuit Breaker System with bypass
One & a Half Circuit Breaker System
Double Circuit Breaker System
The third and fourth system, stated above offer great flexibility in operation but involve
higher cost than first and second system.
9.12.2 Conclusion
The increased cost for the different circuit breaker system must be weighed against the
liquidated benefits of higher flexibility and availability in operation. In particular, such
benefits will occur, where in case of circuit breaker failure risk of a subsequent complete
shut down of one of the units is larger than with more complex circuit breaker system. The
risk of a circuit breaker failure is, however, difficult to predict. It depends not only on the
9 - 18
statistical failure rate of the breaker itself, but also on the mode of operation of the plant and
quality and intervals of maintenance. Life expectancy for the equipment is in any case very
high under rated condition.
Based on the above considerations, the best alternative, the standard configuration i.e.
single bus with single circuit breaker arrangement is proposed. In case of fault, the faulty
section can be isolated in minimum time with the operation of respective circuit breaker and
isolators etc.
9.12.3 Switchyard Layout Arrangement
At all power stations the power generated at low voltage is stepped up to high voltage for
transmission onward. Gantry structure would be installed to accommodate the incoming
conductor from the step up transformers and the outgoing 132 KV Transmission Line. A
single bus of appropriate size aluminum conductor tube would be installed to provide
convenient connection between the step up transformer and the out going transmission line.
Three phase circuit breakers and isolators have been employed for the safe connections
and the isolation protection etc. High mast structures with overhead conductors are
proposed to avoid lightning strokes etc to the switch yard equipment.
9.12.4 Design Criteria
The switchgear is assumed to be the conventional outdoor type with modern SF 6 circuit
breakers. The design consists of three bays: one for the main step-up transformer, one for
the outgoing line and one for bus-bar voltage transformers. There is also space for one
extra bay. The following design criteria would apply:
Installation of equipment outdoor
Highest Voltage for Equipment 145 KV
Rated Short Circuit Current (1s) 25 KA
Rated Lightning impulse withstand
Voltage 1.2/50 s (peak value) 650 KV (to earth)
One minute power frequency
With stand voltage 275 KV
9.12.5 132 kV Circuit Breakers
The circuit breakers and auxiliary equipment would conform to IEC standards. The
proposed Circuit breakers are the outdoors type SF 6 circuit breakers.
The 132 kV SF 6 breakers are designed for the following ratings:
Nominal voltage 132 KV
9 - 19
Highest voltage 145 KV
Frequency 50 Hz
No. of Phases 3
B.I.L rating 650 kV
Busbar arrangement Single
Nominal current 1600A
Bus bar and Out-going line 1600A
Short circuit current 31.5 kA
Rated supply voltage for control & auxiliary
Circuits, DC volts 220
9.13 Telecommunication
9.13.1 Internal Communication
A digital telephone network shall be installed in the powerhouse to cover the entire plant,
powerhouse, intake and the residential colony. Each generating unit shall include at least
one telephone per floor. All cranes shall be connected to this communication system, as
well as the working and lay down areas. The central exchange shall be connected to the
station battery to ensure no outage in the case of a complete shutdown of the plant.
9.13.2 External Communication
A Power Line Carrier Communication system (PLCC) shall be installed for communication
between powerhouse and load dispatch centre. The coupling shall be done between one
phase and earth which necessitate installation of one line trap for each communication line
and one coupling capacitor at each terminal. Line traps and capacitive voltage transformers
shall be installed in the switchyard and/or in the control room. The 48 V supply shall be
provided by DC/DC Converters fed by the 110 V main battery.
9.14 Transmission Line and Interconnections
9.14.1 Transmission Line
(i) General Design Criteria
The following is provided as general indication of the criteria to be applied in the design.
The design work shall include final load flow studies, tower spotting, tower selection and
application, preparation of plan and profile drawings showing towers and conductors
clearances, conductor and shields wire sag and tension calculations, foundation design,
clipping offset calculations, structures lists and leg extension information, site preparation
9 - 20
requirements, design of access roads and trails, design of road crossings, railroad
crossings, river crossings, preparation of clearance and permit diagrams, and all other
engineering design services normally associated with the engineering design of a high
voltage transmission line.
(ii) Vertical Clearances
The minimum clearances that shall be maintained at the maximum final conductor sag are
shown below.
Closing Clearance Description Crossing Clearance

(Meters)
Over lands and areas transverse by vehicles 7.5
Over highways 8.0
Over ground wires of other power lines 3.5
Over distribution conductors 3.5
Over communication lines 3.5
Over roofs of buildings and accessible to pedestrians 5.9
(iii) Lattice Steel Structures
Galvanized steel structures shall be of single/double circuit type for safely supporting and
carrying all dead wind, pull off and any other applied loads. Dimensions and all
arrangements shall be such that specific electrical clearances are not infringed. Steel
structures shall be rigid and self-supporting once erected. The design shall be such as to
keep the number of different parts as small as possible and to facilitate transport, erection
and inspection.
(iv) Conductors
Conductors for transmission line are aluminum conductor steel reinforced (ACSR) Lynx type
or other with suitable cross sectional area, keeping in view the nominal plant capacity and
consequences of line loss. Conductors should be capable of economically transmitting all
electrical load.
All materials and fabrication of the conductors shall be governed by the applicable ASTM
and ANSI standards or equivalent standards.
(v) Dampers
Steel dampers for transmission line conductors shall be capable of providing safety against
conductor galloping caused by nay wind pressure and of standard size meeting IEC
requirements.
(vi) Insulators
All insulators for the transmission line conductors shall satisfactorily withstand prevailing
climatic and service conditions. Insulators and accessories shall be in accordance with the
applicable ANSI, IEC and ASTM standards or equivalent standards.
9 - 21
(vii) Shield Wire
A shield wire shall run on the top of the steel towers supporting the conductors to protect
the line conductors against direct lightning strokes. The shields wire shall be stranded
glazed steel wire, and connected to the structure with appropriate hardwire. The design
shall provide for adequate clearance between the shield wire and energized conductors.
The shield wire should provide the low impedance path to earth for all incidental current it
may have to carry.
Shield wire shall be in accordance with ASTM A 363, Class A galvanizing, and/or other
equivalent/ applicable standards (e.g. IEC). Appropriate steel dampers shall be provided.
(viii) Structure Grounding Arrangement
Steel structure for the transmission line shall be grounded through ground rods. The ground
rods shall be copper covered steel (copper weld) of 19 mm (3/4 inch) diameter and
minimum 3 meters in length. The ground rods shall be driven in ground and bolted to the
legs of steel structure through hard drawn electrolytic bare copper conductor.
9.14.2 Interconnection with National Grid System
The existing transmission system in the area has been extensively studied. The existing
system feeding Swat / Mansehra Districts is connected to NTDC/ WAPDA grid system by
means of 132 kV Battal, 132 kV Mansehra grid station and by existing 66 kV Chaksar -
Daggar - Chakdara grid station in Mansehra west region.
Information gathered from the local office of NTDC/ WAPDA revealed that 132 / 11 kV Batal
grid station is the existing last point of NTDC System. It has therefore been considered
feasible that the output of Jabori Hydropower Project would be injected to 132 kV Batal grid
station for further interconnection with the existing NTDC / WAPDA system. The proposed
132 KV transmission line route station is shown in the Figure-9.5.
A separate line bay is proposed in 132 KV Battal Grid Station with approximate cost of Rs 6
(Six) Millions. This line bay will be constructed NTDC / WAPDA.
9 - 22
FIGURES
CHAPTER
10
ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL

ASSESSMENT (IEE & SIA)
Jabori Hydropower Project Final Feasibility Report Chapter 10
CHAPTER 10
ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT
(IEE & SIA)
10.1 General
Hydropower is a primary domestic and renewable source of energy. Pakistan is endowed

with a hydel potential of approximately 40,000 MW, most of which lies in the Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa, Gilgit Baltistan, Azad Jammu & Kashmir and some parts of Punjab. In spite
of this, Pakistans energy market investment in hydel power generation has, unfortunately,
been caught up in confusion and paradoxes for many decades and no significant progress
has been achieved so far. The Government is also trying to facilitate private investors to
promote hydel power generation in the country but the efforts have so far not succeeded.
Electric power is a stimulator for the socio-economic uplift of the country. However, only half
of the countrys population has access to electricity. After the creation of Pakistan, the
country faced numerous problems including dearth of electrical power.
Fortunately, abundant hydel potential remains untapped which needs to be harnessed. The
total installed capacity of the hydropower stations in the country is about 6,595 MW, out of
which 3,767 MW is in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, 1,698 MW in Punjab, 1,036 MW in AJK and 93
MW in the Gilgit Baltistan, which represents merely 15 % of the total identified potential.
10.2 Need for the Environmental Study
The law makes it mandatory to carry out Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) or detailed
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the development projects depending upon the
nature and magnitude of the impacts. Pakistan Environmental Protection Agency (Pakistan-
EPA) regulatory guidelines (Pakistan Environmental Assessment Procedure; 1997; Policy
and Procedures for filling, review and approval of environmental assessment (pp 15 & 17))
exempt a hydropower and dam project from being put to EIA only when:
The dams and reservoir have a water storage volume less than 50 million m3 or the
surface area is less than 8 km.
Hydropower generation capacity is less than 50 MW.
The Jabori Hydropower Project is generally a run-of-the river project wherein the reservoir
storage capacity and areal spread is less than the limits identified above and even power
generation capacity is less than 50 MW. Moreover, the Project does not induce significant
environmental and social disruption. On these grounds the project does not qualify for
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), rather an Initial Environmental Examination will
suffice. As the Project falls in the jurisdiction of Pak-EPA and ADB, for that matter
Environmental Protection Agency of Khyber Pakhtonkhwa and Asian Development Bank,
therefore, it is desirable that regulatory requirements for environmental protection and social
safeguards of both Government of Pakistan and Asian Development are adhered to.
10 - 1
All ADB projects are assigned one of four categories (A, B, C, or FI) for environmental
assessment. The category is assigned based on the projects potential for environmental
impact. The proposed Project is classified by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) as
categories B a project with some adverse environmental impacts, but of lesser degree
and/or significance than those for category A projects.
This chapter has been prepared keeping in view the regulatory requirements of both Pak-
EPA and ADB.
10.3 Approach Adopted for the Study
Initial Environmental Examination study is required to cover several parameters relating to

physical, biological and human setting of the Project area. Both primary and secondary
sources were explored to gather information regarding various environmental and social
parameters of the project. As a first step a reconnaissance visit to the project area was
made to familiarize with the environmental and social setting and carrying out a screening
process to identify the probable areas of impacts. On the basis of this a plan was prepared
to carry out environmental and social survey and conducting scoping sessions for public
consultation. Consultation was also carried out with officials of various department,
knowledgeable people, public representatives and local NGOs. In addition to this primary
source, information was also extracted from the published literature and data from
secondary source.
10.4 Scope of the IEE Study
The scope of IEE study includes:
Assessment of the existing status of environment and socioeconomic aspects.
Identification of potential impacts on various environmental components due to

activities envisaged during construction and operational phases of the proposed Hydro
electric project and proposed mitigations actions.
Prediction of significant impacts on major environmental components.
Delineation of Environmental Management & Monitoring Plan (EMMP) outlining

measures to minimize adverse impacts of the proposed project.
Prepare abbreviated resettlement plan for compensating the affected persons (APs)
10.5 Environmental Baseline Condition
The environmental baseline conditions have been established on the basis of the
information gathered from the field through structured interviews, formal and informal
scoping sessions and group discussions with the communities of various settlements
located along the river and in the vicinity of sites selected for construction of Project
components. In addition, information was also gathered from officials of various
departments including departments of Forestry, Wildlife, Agriculture and Revenue. The
10 - 2
information available from the limited secondary source has also been used for drawing
inferences.
10.5.1 Delineation of the Study Area
From environmental and social view point the project area is defined as the areas of the
project influence. Some of these areas are directly impacted while others may be influenced
indirectly. For this project the areas of most concerns are as follows:
Areas falling in the vicinity of the structures, viz., Weir, Powerhouse, and upstream and
downstream portals of the Power Tunnel,
Areas to be used for establishing construction camps and colony,
Areas likely to be submerged by water impoundment,
Areas likely to be used for dumping of spoil material from excavation of tunnel and the
sites where weir and power house are going to be located,
Areas to be used for developing haul tracks,
Quarry areas,
About 7 km stretch of the river reach from Weir up to the Powerhouse that is going to
be deprived from the river flows during low-flow season for its practical diversion into
the Power Tunnel for power generation,
Areas located on high-benches through which the Power Tunnel is going to be

excavated. These areas are not going to be directly affected, but it is likely that the
settlements on these benches may be disrupted due to vibrations from blasting and
drilling at the Power Tunnel.
Majority of residential area is not going to be directly impacted by the Project; however,
the area is likely to have indirect effects of mixed type. Primarily, the induction of heavy
machinery and vehicles, particularly when transporting construction material from
quarries falling on other side of the town, will cause traffic congestions and hazards,
while on the other hand the induction of outside workforce will be beneficial in boosting
the local business.
The population residing in the valley on both sides of the Siran River that is dependent
on Agriculture, sand and gravel extraction, shopping, etc is going to be impacted due to
break in the communication by the creation of the reservoir.
10.5.2 Land Resources
10.5.2.1 Geology, Morphology and Soils
The project area is a part of land formations developed at the foothills of Himalayan Range
through tectonic events subsequent to those that caused building of Himalaya. The rock
formations include extremely folded beds of various types of sandstones, clay-stones and
silt stones.
10 - 3
Mostly the mountains are covered with primary soils, except along the river and nullahs
where the beds are almost devoid of soil material either for steep slopes of for the scouring
action of the river/nullah flows. Within the flood plains where slopes are milder to nearly
level deposits of secondary soils are met with. Such areas include Sacha Khurd, Deedal,
Giyar Sachan, Upper Bela, Lower Bela, Kalawan, Granthali and Kundi Sehri Villages of
Mansehra District, which are used for agricultural purposes.
10.5.2.2 Seismic Hazards
The project area lies in an earthquake prone area with high degree of Seismicity. A number
of active local and regional faults pass around the project sites. It lies very close to the Main
Boundary Thrust (MBT) which is at a distance of about 15 km towards east. Jabori
hydropower project is located in tectonically and seismically critical zones of convergence
between Indo-Pakistan and Eurasia continental plates.
The nearest fault to the Jabori site is the Kashmir Trust that is an extension of Main Frontal
Thrust (MFT), also known is Pakistan as the Himalayan Front Trust (HFT), which ruptured
in October 2005 causing devastating M 7.6 earthquake.
10.5.3 Water Resources
10.5.3.1 Surface Water
The main surface water resource of the Project area is the Siran River, which flows along
Jabori town and joins the Indus River at Tarbela Reservoir. There are numerous smaller
nullahs that discharge into the Siran River from left and right side.
10.5.3.2 Groundwater
Basically, the Project area, and the Mansehra District, for that matter are devoid of any true
ground water aquifer. This is because of the rocky formation of the area and steep slopes of
the mountains. However, springs are widely spread in the area. Local people normally use
spring waters for consumptive purposes.
10.5.3.3 Water Quality
The waters from nullah/river and springs are safe for consumption from chemical ingredient
point of view except that turbidity in river water is high, but from biological point of view
these are unsafe for drinking purposes. Even spring waters are contaminated with bacteria.
The water of springs would require appropriate treatment, before these are used for drinking
by construction crew.
10.5.4 Biological Resources
10.5.4.1 Flora
The Mansehra District is rich in natural vegetation. Besides the scattered vegetation in
almost entire area, the hills are covered with forests of broad leaf and pine trees in
accordance with the altitude. Fruit trees are very rare. These are generally found in the
courtyards of the farming communities. Main flora in the District is shown in Table-10.1a.
10 - 4
Most common trees are Drawa, Deodar, Shisham, Pine, Poplar, Chir, Draic and Bakain.
Fruit trees like Apricot, Pear, Peaches, etc. also exist in project area. Main flora in project
area is given in Table-10.1b.
10.5.4.2 Fauna
Most of fauna in the project area are domestic.
Table-10.2a & 10.2b enlists the commonly occurring wildlife in the District and in the project
area, respectively.
10.5.4.3 Rare or Endangered Species
There is no endangered species in the project area.
10.5.4.4 Aquatic Life
Fish diversity in the Siran River is limited. The available fish in Siran River are Barbus tor
putitora. This fish is an undisputed king of the Himalayan Rivers.
However, no definite record is available, as there is no official from the Fishery Department
posted at Jabori. There is no commercial fishery in the area. Even traditional fishermen do
not exist. However, some fishery is carried out for household use and recreational purpose.
10.5.4.5 Birds
Bird life is scanty. The birds such as Crow, Kite and common Sparrow, King Fisher, Monal,
Little brown dove can be seen. During winter, however, a few migratory bird species visit
the project area on route to further south. The project area is devoid of any habitat for the
migratory species. Some species however use local water resources as resting and feeding
ground.
10.5.5 Climate
10.5.5.1 General
The climate of the district is warm in summer and cold in winter. Since the district is at an
elevation of 2000 to 4500 meters and as such the winter season remains extremely cold in
the upper half of the district while in the lower half it remains moderate. Snow fall generally
starts by the end of November on the high peaks of the mountains and descends
downwards as the temperature falls further. Snow fall also occurs in the late February and
continues sometimes up to the middle of the March after which the weather becomes
pleasant and usually remains mild during the remaining period of the year. January is the
coldest month. May through August is the summer months.
Rainfall is less in the Northern portion of the district .The data on mean Temperature and
Rainfall recorded at Balakot station for the period 1961-90 is as shown in Table-10.3.
10 - 5
10.5.5.2 Temperature
The data which is depicted in Table 10.3 shows that the average monthly mean maximum
temperature varies from 14.0 C in January to 35 C in June, whereas monthly mean
minimum temperature ranges between 2 C in January and 21 C in June.
10.5.5.3 Precipitation
Table-10.3 shows that the average annual precipitation of the project area is 1680mm most
part of which is received during monsoon moths, winter rains are received during February
to April.
10.5.5.4 Evaporation
Tarbela Reservoir is the nearest station where the evaporation data was available. Climatic
condition of this reservoir is similar as that of the project area and as such this data has
been utilized for project area. Mean monthly maximum and minimum evaporation at Tarbela
Reservoir is 250 mm and 65 mm, respectively. The mean monthly maximum and minimum
evaporation in the year 2000 is 270 mm and 70 mm, respectively.
10.5.6 Ambient Air Quality
No air quality monitoring data is available for the project area. However, no major sources
of air pollution, viz., industries, exist in the project area except road traffic in the valleys of
Siran River and other nullahs. This may be deteriorating the quality of air to some extent.
However, due to presence of ample plantation and green areas on the mountains off side
the roads the air quality is expected to be generally good.
10.5.7 Ambient Noise Levels
The project area is located in the valleys surrounded by steep slopes having vegetation.
There are very few houses located near the sites of project components. Though the roads
are available in the project area but the intensity of traffic is very low and the level of noise
is assumed to be low.
Generally, the ambient noise level in the project area is less than the permissible limits of 85
dB (A) as fixed by Pak EPA, or the WHO noise guidelines that prescribe a limit of 55 dB (A)
with respect to receptors in outdoor areas.
10.5.7 Socio-Economic Set-up of the Project Area
10.5.7.1 Political and Administrative Set-up
Mansehra District covers an area of 4,579 square kilometers and is administratively divided
into three sub-divisions namely Mansehra, Balakot and Oghi. In addition a belt of tribal area
known as Kala Dhaka is also under the administrative control of the District. Politically the
district is governed by District Coordination Officer (DCO). The District Coordination Officer
stationed at district headquarter Mansehra is responsible for law & order situation in the
district and is the custodian of state property.
10 - 6
On the revenue side, each sub-division has a separate revenue set-up consisting of an
Deputy District Officer (Revenue), revenue officers, kanungos and patwaris. The district is
further divided into kanungo halqas and patwar circles. The kanungos supervise the work of
patwaries of their respective patwar circle.
10.5.7.2 Demography of the Project Area
The Project area falls in two Patwar Circles (PCs), viz., Jabori and Mang. Jabori Town,
where weir will be located, is located in Jabori Patwar Circle in Mansehra Tehsil of
Mansehra District. The population of Jabori PC is 13,521 Jabori with a population of 6,203
is the biggest village amongst the five villages falling in the PC Jabori.
Granthali village, where power station will be located, is located in Bhogar Mang Patwar
Circle and its population was 1,521 as per 1998 census. In Jabori 99.76% and in Granthali
100% population is Muslim and household size is 6.7 and 6.8 in respective area.
The analysis of the socio-economic data collected from project villages reveals that the 62%
population falls between 10-50 years of age group. The Highest 20.88% belongs to 10-20
years age group followed by 17.40% who are in 20-30 years, 12.76% in 30-40 years and
10.90 % in 40-50 years. Children (<10 years) are 27.37 % and remaining 4.41% and 6.25 %
falls in 50-60 and 60 & above category respectively. The same results are shown in Table-
10.4
Socio-economic household data collected through field surveys reflects that with a
household size of 6.06, the gender composition of surveyed villages is 53.36 males to 48.04
females.
Project area is home of a diverse group of people including different tribes and clans,
amongst whom Swati are dominant with a percentage of 73.2. Remaining population
belongs to Yousaf zai (15%), Tanoli (8.2%), Gujiiar (3.1%), Awan (2.4%) and Quraishi
(2.1%) tribes. Community, on the whole, is socially cohesive with minor conflicts which are
resolved locally by the elders.
Almost 85 % of houses in the Project Area are pacca, while 10 % are semi pacca and about
5 % are katcha.
A single housing unit, on the average, comprises 3-4 residential rooms, 1-2 animal sheds
and one bath room. Average room size for the living room is 30 square meters (98.2 square
feet) while animal sheds average size is 28 square meter. Average area of one house is
165 square meters. Most of the houses are build of wood and stone, however, use of mud
and stones is also observed in second class construction.
Data was collected on the assets possessed by the households (HH) which reflect that
more than half of the populations possess Radio and TV. Most of them (83.53 %) have cell
phones while only 12.37% have vehicle. Table-10.5 shows the number of assets per
household and their price.
Findings of the analysis on the provision of social amenities//infrastructure for the

households reveals that drinking water and washing / bathing points, mosques, graveyards,
10 - 7
electricity and primary schools for boys/girls, are those amenities which are available to
most of the households (see Table-10.6), while telephone connections, disposal of solid
and liquid waste are available to lesser percentages. Area is almost devoid of secondary
school, dispensary and hospital. Availability of social amenities and the degree of efficiency
is depicted in Table-10.6.
10.5.7.3 Socioeconomic Conditions of the Project Area
Half of the household members are not working as they are either very young to take up
work or could not get an opportunity to work. Women play a vital role as housewives taking
up most of the domestic works. Agriculture and livestock are the main and secondary
occupations, respectively of the residents. Average Income from main occupation is Rs
8,000 per month and from secondary occupation it is Rs 5,000 per month. Results of social
survey show that only 3.09% households own a shop/business.
Of the total landholdings in the project area 15.6% is available for cultivation, 25.1% is
forest land, 16.2 is grazing land while the remaining land is under residential settlements or
lie in the form of uncultivable waste land. Different land and land use types in the project
area are shown in Table-10.7.
Wheat, maize and rice are cultivated on about 284 kanal, 247 kanal and 137 kanal of land,
respectively. Rice is not a common crop of Jabori Town but it is cultivated in Bhogarmang.
Average production per kanal is 200 Kgs for wheat, 360 Kgs for maize and 280 Kgs for rice.
Average production of wheat, maize and Paddy is 200, 360 and 280 Kg/kanal, respectively.
Wheat is cultivated for the individual family needs and average cultivated land per family is
about 5 28 Kanals.
Socio economic data reflects that livestock holding per household is not very high. On the
average, each household possess 1.63 goats and 13.06 poultry. The remaining livestock
possession by a household is less than one which is evident from Table-10.8
Majority of respondents do not experience any shortage of food in any part of the year.
However, according to less than one fourth of respondent households, food deficiency does
occur in winter months.
The diseases in the Project area are:
Acute Respiratory Track Infection (ARI)
Gastroenteritis
Chronic Dieses such as TB.
There is no health facility in the Project area. The people have to go to Shinkiari, Mansehra
and Dadar. Dadar is known for its Tuberculosis Sanitarium, where weather is very pleasant
in summers due to thick vegetation.
10 - 8
10.5.7.4 Land Ownerships
Lands in the project area are mainly proprietary and used for cultivation and settlements.
River and nullah beds alongwith the adjacent slopes are also proprietary land. However,
majority of the affected population of Jabori site (98 %) are non-settler. They own land in the
Project Area but reside elsewhere. While in case of Granthali village the affected population
is almost resident-owner.
As such, the Project components will be located on the proprietary land. Even the reservoir
will occupy the proprietary lands. However, the Power Tunnel will pass underneath the
lands belonging either to the Forestry Department. These lands would not be affected by
the project as the tunnel will be below the natural ground.
It is also observed that the landholdings are small. The landholdings of the affected families
range from 5 Kanal to 18 kanals.
Land required for construction camps and colony has been proposed to be acquired from
the land available on the raised benches near village Kundi Sehri.
10.5.7.5 Gender Situation
The Project area is mainly male dominating society. Within the prevailing social culture,
preference of a son over a daughter is predominant mainly for reasons of continuation of
lineage. Women are infrequently consulted; usually men have the deciding power and make
the purchases for females. Rural women mostly remain inside the home. Men usually do
not share their plans relating to land and livestock with their wives. Young girls are born to
be submissive and have to obey the rules framed by the males in society.
The situation of women in the project area has been analyzed through Gender Survey
conducted in the project villages. Overall situation of women in the project area based on
the findings of this survey is summarized below.
Food Consumption: Womens share in the daily consumption of food was assessed in
comparison with men. According to the opinion of 69 % of respondents womens share in
daily food consumption is somewhat less as compared to men. Proteins in the form of meat,
eggs, milk, and beans are frequently consumed by women, i.e. there is no gender
difference in the quality of food.
Housing: On the average, each household share 2.42 rooms in which 0.7 rooms are used
exclusively by women. Bathroom and toilet facilities within the house are available for
women in most of the houses.
Decision Making: Decisions of marriage of children, sale purchase of property and

purchase of household consumption items largely rest with the men with a meager role of
occasional consultation with women.
Responsibilities: Womens pressing responsibilities are maintenance of house followed by

food arrangement for household, child rearing and treatment of ailing members both men
and women.
10 - 9
Awareness of Project: Awareness of the project amongst women is quite low as only 18%
women respondents had knowledge that a hydropower project is coming in their area. They,
however, expect that project will be beneficial for the area and shall resolve some of their
economic and social problems. They are anticipating that project will bring schools and
educational facilities and hospitals in the area and hoped that the problems of women shall
also be addressed by the project.
10.6 Public Consultation
The Environmental Protection Act makes the participation of the local communities mandatory
in the planning and design of a development project. Scoping session is a process that
ensures participation of the communities, knowledgeable people of the Project area and other
stakeholders of the Project. The objectives of this process are to:
1. Share information with stakeholders on proposed Project and expected impact on the
physical, biological, and socio-economic environment of the project corridor.
2. Understand stakeholders concerns relating to environmental hazards and social

disruption and recording their suggestions in respect of mitigation actions and
facilitations.
3. Understand the concerns of the female members of the affected population.
4. Address specific issues relating to:
Disruption of settlements, earning of people who get benefits from the land, disruption
of spring, Flora and Fauna etc.
Depletion of river water for part of the year in the stretch between Weir and Power
House when the flows will be diverted through the Power Tunnel.
Social concerns of the population settled on the high benches near both the portals of
the Power Tunnel and Power House that is not directly disrupted by the Project.
10.6.1 Major Development Issue Discussed During Scoping Sessions
Project area is connected with the Karakoram Highway (KKH) through a road, which is
under construction. Residents demanded the completion of this road as well as roads to the
settlements, bridges, educational facilities and employment opportunities. The most
pressing problem perceived by the respondents is lack of health facilities within the project
area. Project would bring physical infrastructure, educational, health and other facilities to
the area and improve the services thereby improving the living standards of the community.
10.6.2 Perception of Respondents about the Project
Representatives of households were asked about their understanding regarding: positive

and negative impacts of the project, upon employment opportunities, mobility of the
villagers, income generation activities, living standard, availability of electricity, agricultural
activities, deforestation and about drinking water. A large number of respondents
considered that the project will have positive impact and expressed their views that the
10 - 10
project will provide good opportunities in all the fields. The perceptions on various impacts
of the project are depicted in the Table-10.9.
10.6.3 Main Concern of the Stakeholders
Main concerns raised by the stakeholders are provided following paragraphs:
A. Constructional Phase
Contractor should not use the local resources without permission of the community.
Contactor should employ the local people, as they know the local norms and
customs.
Affected people should provide the job opportunities during construction phase on
preference basis.
Contractor labor should be careful about local customs.
Mobility of local women should not be hindered due to construction activities

particularly at time of their usage of open field latrine facilities.
Construction activities should not hinder the daily activities of the locals.
Contractor should keep their machinery within the project area.
Contactor should make proper arrangements to control the noise and air pollution.
Contractor should not dispose off their camps waste in the community area and it
should be properly disposed off.
Contactor should not cut the tree nearby the project area for their consumption for
food cooking in camps. He should arrange alternative sources like gas cylinders,
etc. for cooking purposes.
B. Operational Phase
Project should provide the job opportunities to the local community on regular basis.
Local community would be face water scarcity due to diverting the water to power
tunnel there should be an arrangement for release some compensation water for
community uses.
Project should provide gas, telephone, and water supply facilities to the local
community.
Arrangements should be made to control the noise and air pollution.
A process of community consultation should be continued even at operation stage

of the Project.
10.6.4 Addressal of Stakeholders Concerns
Following measures will be adopted to address the stakeholders concerns.
10 - 11
A. Constructional Phase
Preference will be given to the local people for employment during construction
activates.
Contractor will make arrangements for utilization of resources with the consultation
of community.
Contractor will ensure the availability of gas cylinders for cooking in camps.
Wastes of the construction camp will be disposed of properly.
Camp site will be at least 500 m away from nearby settlements.
Contractor will comply all the local norms and customs.
Waste of construction camps will not be disposed of into the community area.
Proper working timings will be adopted to minimize the hindrance to the local
community mobility particularly woman.
B. Operation Phase
Local population will be provided the job opportunities particular to PAPs.
Efforts will be made to provide the utility services in the nearby localities which are
under influence of the Project.
Release of water from weir made compulsory as per social or aquatic ecological
requirements.
Proper measures to control the noise and air pollution will be adopted by the
Project.
Community consultation process will be continued even at operation stage.
Consultation with local community and their concerns, grievances and demands are described
in tabular form in Table-10.10.
10.7 Potential Impacts and Mitigations
10.7.1 Delineation of Projects Areas of Influence
Before proceeding to the environmental analysis of the project, it is imperative to delineate the
areas of project influence. In general, the project affected areas have been considered at two
levels, viz. primary and secondary. The primary level affected areas are those that are directly
impacted by the project, these include areas where major construction activities are going to
take place for construction of project structures, establishment of construction camps and
colonies, borrow, quarrying and spoil disposal areas, construction of access and haul tracks,
etc. In case of dam and hydropower projects the downstream flows are also reduced due to
retention and diversion of water. Therefore, the downstream reach up to a certain limit, most
likely till another tributary discharges its flow into the concerned Nullah, is also considered as
primary affected area.
Besides the directly impacted areas referred to above, the construction-related and
10 - 12
subsequently traffic-borne noise and air pollution may influence areas at large distances away
from the primary affected areas. The project construction as well as operational activities may
have a variety of direct and indirect effects on the physical, biological and human resources of
the project area and its environment. Even the direct impacts may be of primary or secondary
nature. Strictly speaking, the primary impacts are directly related to the circumstances where
land is to be acquired; people are affected in so far as their physical displacement or relocation
is involved. Likewise, removal of vegetative cover for construction may also be considered as a
primary impact. On the other hand, secondary impacts entail the direct impacts on physical,
biological and human resources arising from the pollution caused by noise, vibrations, toxic
emissions, spills, dust, or consumption of natural resources, etc. Depending upon the direct
and indirect impacts, the areas of influence would be of two types, i.e., one taken in
consideration of land acquisition and resettlement and the other on the basis of environmental
aspects.
10.7.2 Project Impact Matrix
Table-10.11 exhibits impacts of the project in the form of a matrix. This illustrates the impacts
of various components of the project during construction as well as operational phases on
various physical, biological and social environmental parameters qualitatively. The evaluation
ranking of effects on various environmental parameters has been depicted with symbols
denoted as O for insignificant or none, L for low, M for medium and H for high while type
of effect is designated as A for adverse and B for beneficial. Likewise, NA denotes for not
applicable and ND for not determined.
In general, the impact assessment has been made specific to the areas likely to be affected
directly by the project components. Noise generated by the construction activity may scare
wildlife inhabiting in the forests. Therefore, this aspect has also been considered and an
environmental parameter has been included in the matrix indicated as Wildlife
(Scaring/Facilitating). It has been assessed that the construction activities of the project will
not disrupt the natural habitats; however the noise generated by the construction machinery
may result in adverse effects on the wildlife but of very low level or insignificant category. On
the other hand, creation of an impoundment (reservoir) during the operation of the project will
be beneficial for the wildlife through providing a feeding and drinking place.
The preceding paragraphs have provided a generalized overview of the Project Impact Matrix,
while detailed account on the effects of the project on various environmental and social
parameters, particularly with reference to potential effects of the project is described in the
subsequent sections.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS
10.7.3. Land Resources
This section explains how the proposed project could potentially affect the land resources
through change in land use, soil erosion and contamination and describes mitigation
measures to manage these impacts.
10 - 13
10.7.3.1 Impact on Land Use and Resources
a) Land Productivity and Use
It is obvious that acquisition of land for weir, access road or establishing contractors
facilities will change the local land use pattern. The change in land use for the
former activity will be permanent while that for latter ones it will be temporary.
It is envisaged that use of borrow material will be limited because most of the
material will be formed at excavation at the weir site. However, it will cause the loss
of some of the fertile plough layer and a drop in the elevation thus resulting in the
decrease of land productivity.
Potential conflicts may emerge with landowners regarding the restoration of
temporarily acquired areas for establishing contractors facilities, particularly borrow
and spoil disposal areas.
Borrow pits and other landscape depressions if left open, may prove hazardous to
human beings, livestock and wildlife. Moreover, rain water pounding in open pits can
be a potential health hazard both for human beings and livestock due to mosquito
breeding and the pollution caused by stagnation of the water.
b) Soil Erosion and Land Sliding
Notwithstanding the land sliding problems that aggravated after the earthquake, the
cutting of hillside slopes for project structures will further destabilize the slopes. Most
of the hill slopes in the project area are covered with variable thickness of primary or
colluviums. Excavation at the toe of the hill for construction of the access road will
destabilize the colluviums resting on the upper part of the slopes there by promoting
the landslides. Thus if hillside or valley side slopes are left unprotected these will be
subject to a natural weathering and become increasingly prone to soil erosion and
land sliding.
Soil erosion may occur in the workshop areas as a result of improper runoff drawn
from the equipment washing-yards and improper management of construction
activities in hilly areas particularly in the vicinity of natural streams. Soil erosion may
also occur at quarry areas, if unmanaged blasting is carried out.
The reduction in vegetative cover will reduce the binding capacity of the soil and
susceptibility to erosion by the force of rainfall resulting in increased soil erosion and
removal of plant nutrients. The loss of vegetative cover can increase propensity for
landslides.
Uncontrolled dumping of waste or excavated material on the valley side slopes will
overload and overstress the top of the slope and upon saturation these loose dumps
will slide down into the river.
c) Soil Contamination
Land may be contaminated by the spillage of chemicals like fuels, solvents, oils,
paints and other construction chemicals and concrete. This normally happens when
10 - 14
these materials are transported in open or loosely capped containers or by careless

handling.
The possible contamination of soil by oils and chemicals at campsites, workshop

areas and equipment washing-yards may limit the future use of land.
It is anticipated that a large quantity of excavated material will need to be disposed

of. If this waste material is not properly disposed of, it will contaminate the soil and
water resources, especially during the monsoon season.
10.7.3.2 Mitigation Measures
The mitigation measures, which will be carried out in construction as well as operation
stages for land resources are as under:
a) Land Productivity and Use
Project facilities, viz., construction camp and workshop will be located at a minimum
distance of 500 m from wildlife habitats and settlements, etc. This limit will be 1000
m in the case of asphalt batching plant. If there are constraints to meet with these
conditions due to hilly terrain, the contractor will consult the Engineerin-charge for
resolving the matter.
Prior to the commencement of construction activities, the contractor will submit a

layout and location plan of the facilities to the Engineer-in-charge, Local Government
and Khyber Pakhtonkhwa-EPA, for its scrutiny and approval.
As far as possible, waste land i.e. areas not under agricultural, residential or
forestation use will be used for borrow material and setting up project facilities.
Where the use of agricultural land is unavoidable for borrow of earth material, the
top 30 cm of the plough layer will be stripped and stockpiled for redressing the land
after the required borrow material has been removed. In case deep ditching is
carried out, the top 1 m layer of the ditching will be stripped and stockpiled. The
ditch will initially be filled with scrap material from construction then leveled with the
stockpiled topsoil to make it match the rest of the area. It shall be ensured that the
scrap does not contain any material that would contaminate soil or water resources.
b) Soil Erosion and Land Sliding
Good engineering practices will help control soil erosion both at construction sites
and in peripheral areas, particularly in borrow and dumping areas and at a long haul
tracks. Soil erosion and landslide remedial measures will be based on geotechnical,
geomorphic and hydrological conditions of the project area and these will vary from
site to site. However, the following measures will be adopted as per site conditions:
Depending upon the valley side slopes, retaining walls will be provided for ensuring
the integrity of the road embankments against erosion, slippage under gravity,
particularly when under-stratum is scoured by the river or due to saturation from the
rain water, plastic flow of the material down the slope and erosion.
10 - 15
It is presumed that the hillside slopes will be protected up to an appropriate elevation

under the contract package for the contractor engaged for project construction.
For mild valley side slope vegetative cover will be provided to check the erosion.
The plantation for slope protection will constitute fast growing indigenous trees with
deep root system for anchoring the soil material and growth of bushes and creeping
grasses having capability of developing mesh of shallow fibrous roots to protect the
slope against pitting from rain water. It may be kept in view that the replacement of
cut pine trees may be planted with the same species and not with other broad
leaved species.
Proper monitoring of the soil erosion and landslide prone areas will be carried out
during operation phase and soil conservation measures (if needed) will be carried
out like provision of physical structures e.g. retaining walls, etc.
c) Soil Contamination
The following practices will be adopted to minimize the risk of soil contamination:
The contractor will be required to train its workforce in the storage and handling of
materials like furnace oil, diesel, petrol and chemicals, etc., that can potentially
cause soil contamination. The contractor will be required to prepare a training
manual and module for all the construction-related activities along with the schedule
of training program and submit to the supervising consultants for approval.
Soil contamination by asphalt and other obnoxious material will be minimized by
placing all containers in caissons or dumped into pits lined with impervious liners to
prevent contamination of soils/groundwater from leachate.
Solid waste generated during construction and at campsites will be properly treated
and safely disposed of only in demarcated waste disposal sites.
10.7.4 Water Resources
This section explains how the proposed project may affect the water resources use,
contamination of water bodies and groundwater, siltation of natural streams and alterations
in drainage pattern; the section also describes mitigation measures to manage these
impacts
10.7.4.1 Impact on Water Resources
The surrounding lands drainage system and water resources will be affected by
construction activities in the following manner:
a) Depletion of the River Flows
Depletion of the river flows when the water is diverted through Power Tunnel will affect the
population of villages as well as aquatic ecosystem falling in the river stretch between the Weir
and the Powerhouse.
Most of the population between weir to powerhouse use spring water for daily agricultural
requirements. There is no water channel or any other structure in this reach which divert Siran
10 - 16
River. Further no water requirements has been discussed by the community during scoping
sessions and it was confirmed during the transect walk by the field staff. Anyhow considerable
ecological flow will also be needed to maintain downstream ecosystem.
b) Use of Local Water Supplies
Local water supplies will need to be tapped to meet camp-site and construction
requirements.
Local water supplies through the springs may be affected due to implementation of
project both in quantity as well as quality.
c) Contamination of Surface and Ground Water Resources
Surface and subsurface water resources in specific part of the project area may be
contaminated by fuel and chemical spills or by dumping of waste material and
effluents generated by the kitchens and toilets at construction camp-sites.
Natural streams and hill torrents will be contaminated with chemicals, oil, lubricants,
detergents, etc. through runoff from the construction area, construction camp,
workshops and equipment washing-yards.
Soil erosion may occur at quarry areas, and it may contaminate the surface water
resources if unmanaged blasting is carried out.
If waste material is not properly disposed of, seepage of polluted water during
monsoon season will pollute surface as well as groundwater quality.
Measures to be adopted to mitigate the adverse impact on water resources and surface
drainage patterns are discussed below:
a) Depletion of The River Flows
The proponent will make arrangement for release of water from the Weir to meet the
demand of downstream reach of the river. Proponent will ensure the release of water
discharge during construction and operation phase of the project.
In the absence of a specific guideline or recommendations for the amount of water

(residual water) to be retained in a watercourse when water is diverted for
hydropower purposes, there are three different methods considered to evaluate
ecological flow:
1. USA (Montana) Method

Percentages of mean flow are specified that provide different quality habitat for fish e.g.
10% for poor quality (survival), 30% for moderate habitat and 60% for excellent habitat.
This method is known as Tennant or Montana method. The Siran River reach
downstream LS Dam site has low biological productivity. Fishery is not being practiced
10 - 17
in the reach. Therefore for survival of natural ecological habitat in this river reach 10%
of mean flow may be specified as per this method.
2. Swiss Standards
The Swiss mountain topography and hydrology is in a way similar to Northern
Pakistan. The minimum residual water flow to be left in a river is determined by a
formula. For water bodies where Q347 equals 500 litres/s discharge (there Q347
means the discharge appearing in the river for more than 347 days of the year, i.e.
more than 95% of the time) a residual flow of 280 litres/s must be retained in the
water body. For every incremental each further discharge of 100 litres/s, above 500
litres/s, an additional 31 litres/s must be left in the water body.
3. CEMAGREF Model
Another formula representing a function of the available mean monthly discharges
and the mean annual discharges was used as presented below:
Q e = {(0.0651 X Q m +2) /100} x Q a
Where Q e = Mean monthly ecological flow (m3/s)
Q m = Mean monthly flow (m3/s)
Q a = Mean annual flow (m3/s)
The formula was also used for feasibility study for Madian HPP and feasibility study of the
Gabral-Kalam HPP and was developed by CEMAGREF which is an Agricultural and
Environmental Engineering Research Organization of (Antony) France. The model is also
recommended by the International Association of Small Hydropower.
Mean monthly ecological flows from weir to downstream as calculated with this method be
given in the Table-10.12. This depicted mean monthly ecological flows with respect to mean
monthly flow from year, 1969 to 2008 and 0.134m3/s is the recommended mean monthly
ecological or residual flow which also covers river water usage for the community as well.
b) Use of Local Water Supplies
The contractor will explore the alternative water resource so that the existing
community water resources are not impacted, moreover existing spring water under
the use of community will be exploited by the Contractor for campsite as well as
construction purposes.
Availability of water for campsite facilities and construction purposes will be ensured
by the Contractor prior to start of construction activities. As per Local Government
Act, the contractor will seek approval from the local government for exploitation of
the water resources.
The Contractor will be required to liaise closely with local communities to ensure that
any potential conflicts related to common resource utilization for project purposes
are resolved quickly.
10 - 18
The contractor will prepare guidelines for the workers for minimizing the wastage of
water during construction activities and at campsites.
c) Contamination of Surface and Ground Water Resources
Camps will be located at least 500 m away from the nearest local settlement to
prevent the contamination of community-owned water resources like springs, hill
torrents, etc.
Construction camps will be established in areas with adequate natural drainage

channels in order to facilitate flow of the treated effluents.
Wastewater effluent from contractors workshops and equipment washing-yards will

be passed through gravel/sand beds to remove oil/grease contaminants before
discharging it into natural streams. Similarly, the wastewater effluent from the
campsite will be treated before disposal into a stream. According to local laws, the
BOD 5 concentration in sewage must be brought down to less than 80 mg/l before
being discharged into a natural stream with a capacity to dilute the effluent further by
10 times.
Borrow pits and natural depressions with pre-laid impervious liners will be used to
dispose of obnoxious material, and then covered with soil. This will check potential
groundwater contamination. Such measures will also be provided at river side
disposal of waste material in addition to retaining walls or gabions. Available stone
(boulders) from excavated rocks will be used for retaining walls as well as for
gabions. It will reduce the quantity of dumping material.
10.7.5 Ambient Air Quality
This section discusses the impact of the construction and operation on the ambient air
quality and noise levels along the Projects area of Influence. It also describes the mitigation
measures to manage these impacts.
10.7.5.1 Impact on air Quality
a) Dust Smoke and other Pollutants from Plants & Equipments
The emission or dust from the batching plant or construction machinery can be very harmful
for the site worker and the local population. The emission/dust could cause skin and
respiratory disease e.g. skin rashes, lungs problem etc. Roads and traffic will be affected
due to the heavy vehicles movement in the area carrying plants and material. Contractor
could select the suitable location provided the following control measures are in place.
b) Smoke from Burning of Waste Material or Burning Firewood
A number of big and small fires in the labour camp can produce smoke and smog which can
cut off visibility, reduce traffic ability and cause suffocation along with causing diseases of
respiratory tract
10 - 19
c) Impact on Air Quality of Earth Work Activities
Excavating activities will generate dust and pollute the surrounding area. The emission from
the plants use in earth work activities will also degrade the air quality of the site. Exhaust of
noxious gases from movement of heavy machinery will further pollute air which will
adversely affect health and vigor of plants.
a) Dust Smoke and other Pollutants from Plants & Equipments
Air quality should be monitored on regular basis near the plant.

The plant should be located at least 500 m away from any living area.
Regular spraying of water should be undertaken to minimize the dust pollution.
All vehicles, machinery, equipment and generators used during construction
activities will be kept in good working condition to minimize the exhaust emissions.
Proper PPE should be issued to the site worker and make sure the worker wears the
PPE properly during working on site.
If batching plant is close to the living area. This site can only be use for batching plant if the
following conditions are followed:
The plant has to be Zero Emission Plant. This will include using washed aggregate
and enclosed cyclone with automatic injection system of material in to the mixing
chamber.
The access roads for the delivery Lorries pass through the living area. These
roads/paths should be sprayed with water on regular basis to minimize dust
pollution.
b) Smoke from Burning of Waste Material or Burning Firewood
It is contractors contractual obligation to use and provide clean and smoke free fuel
in the labour camp.
Cutting and burning trees or shrubs for fuel shall be prohibited.
Gas Cylinders should be used in the labour camp for cooking purposes.
c) Impact on Air Quality of Earth Work Activities
Regular spraying of water should be undertaken to minimize the dust pollution.
All vehicles, machinery, equipment and generators used during construction

activities will be kept in good working condition to minimize the exhaust emissions.
The Contractor will regularly spray water on the site traffic routes to minimize the
dust pollution.
10 - 20
Enforce the maximum speed limit to 20km/h for vehicles using embankments and
access road.
10.7.6 Noise
10.7.6.1 Impact of Noise pollution
a) Noise Pollution from Construction Activities
Construction activities particularly blasting site near the powerhouse area could generate
noise and disturb the natural habitat.
10.7.6.2 Mitigation Measures:
a) Noise Pollution from Construction Activities
Use of vehicles and machinery of good condition and well tuned engine that will reduce
noise hazards according to permissible limits as fixed by Pak EPA for noise is 85 dB
(A) while the WHO noise guidelines prescribed a limit of 55 dB (A), these limits will
be considered in operation phase of the project. The WHO guideline values for
community noise in specific environment is as shown in Table-10.13 and Table-
10.14 provides an indication of relative sound dB (A) levels compared to various
activities for reference.
Monitor noise level on regular basis and maintain the level within the NEQS level.
Monitor noise level on hourly bases at the start of the work activities for at-least first
2 days of work. The monitoring interval could increase to daily after two days.
All working activities should be restricted within the allowed day time particularly for
blasting.
10.7.7 Biological Environment
The impact on flora and fauna and corresponding mitigation measures are described in the
following paragraphs:
10.7.7.1 Impacts on Flora and Fauna
a) Flora
Proposed project will impact about 350 trees and during construction activities and
additionally, the Contractors workers may damage the vegetation and trees (for use as fire-
wood to fulfill the camps requirements).
The cutting of trees will cause degradation of local environment as under.
It will enhance soil erosion. Without the branches and leaves, to break its fall, heavy
storms can quickly wash away the soil from even a gentle slope. Cutting down of
trees/shrubs also takes away the roots that would otherwise help in binding the soil.
10 - 21
During the entire construction period dust laden polluted air will form a dust film on
leaves thus blocking sunshine and stomata consequently hindering photosynthesis
processes causing detrimental effect on the plant health.
b) Fauna
i) Mammals and Reptiles
During the construction phase, there will be some adverse impacts on the mammals
and reptiles of the area, due to construction activities involving excavation, blasting,
access roads, movement of labour, carriage of goods and machinery to various sites
along the Project corridor. Mammals, such as jungle cat, jackal, fox, etc. will avoid
sites within the area of influence. Same will be the case with reptiles. Some reptiles
may be killed during the earthworks operations. Movements of the mammals and
reptiles will be restricted during the construction phase.
Uncontrolled blasting may damage the existing wildlife of the project area. Food and
refuse at the Contractors camps may attract wildlife that might in turn be hunted by
the workers.
Due to establishment of labour camps, food storage, setting up of kitchens

production of sewage and waste water may result in multiplication of rodents like
rats, mice and shrew etc. and vectors like mosquitoes, bugs and flies which will have
a negative impact.
ii) Birds-Avian Fauna
Birds will try to find shelter and food somewhere else and will tend to move away
from the project area due to the activities mentioned above for fear of being hunted/
trapped. Unmanaged blasting activities may harm birds.
iii) Aquatic Fauna
There is no definite record about fish is available, as there is no official from the
Fishery Department posted in Jabori Town. There is no commercial fishery in the
area. Even traditional fishermen do not exist. However, some fishing activities are
carried out for household use and recreational purpose.
a) Flora
It is estimated that against cutting of about 350 trees SHYDO will make a provision
of compensatory plantation at the ratio of 1:3. As such, the total compensatory
plantation comes to about 1050 trees more ever to minimize the impacts on flora;
following measures will be adopted construction and operation stages.
Campsites, workshop and batching plants will be established on waste/barren land

rather than on agriculturally productive land. However, if such type of land is not
10 - 22
available, it will be ensured that minimum clearing of the vegetation is carried out
and minimum damage is caused to trees and undergrowth.
Construction vehicles, machinery and equipment will remain confined within their
designated areas of movement.
The Contractors staff and labour will be strictly directed not to damage any
vegetation such as trees or bushes. They will use the paths and roads for movement
and will not be allowed to trespass through farmlands or forested areas.
Contractor will provide gas cylinders at the camps for cooking purposes and cutting
of trees/bushes for fuel will not be allowed.
Cutting of mother trees, if any, will be avoided, as far as possible, so that the
negative effect to the process of natural regeneration of the species is minimized.
A tree plantation program will be formulated by the SHYDO with the help of local
Forest Department of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and about 1050 trees will be planted.
The SHYDO will enter into an agreement with the Forest Department to implement
the program under deposit work. As the land along the slopes generally belong to
the communities/individual owners, the Forest Department will involve the
communities carrying out plantation on the lands. The Department may also involve
the communities on participatory basis to construct dry stone masonry check dams
to break the length of the slope thus abating the erosion problems.
Open fires should be banned in the area to avoid hazards of fire in the area,
especially in the Chir zone.
(b) Fauna
i) Mammals and Reptiles
Hunting, poaching and harassing of wild animals will be strictly prohibited and
Contractor will be required to warn its labour accordingly.
Blasting and other noise generating activities will not be carried out during the night.
Camps will be located at least 500 m away from the nearest wild life area and their
source of food as well as water.
The camps will be properly fenced and gated to check the entry of wild animals in
search of eatable goods. Similarly, wastes of the camps will be properly disposed off
to prevent it being eating by wild animals, as it may be hazardous to them.
ii) Birds
Special measures will be adopted to minimize impacts on the wild birds, such as
avoiding noise generating activities during the critical periods of breeding.
10 - 23
Staff working on the project should be given clear orders, not to shoot, snare or trap
any bird.
If possible nests of bird, on trees need to be uprooted, be shifted to other nearby

trees.
iii) Aquatic Fauna
The weir intake structure will be designed and constructed to allow the minimum
mean monthly 0.134 m3/s (month wise detail is given in Table-10.12) of water flow to
always be maintained in the Siran River for the maintenance of riparian as well as
aquatic ecosystem of down steam.
B. SOCIAL IMPACTS, MITIGATIONS AND RESETTLEMENT
10.7.8.1 Social Impacts
This section describes the impact of the proposed Project on local communities,
construction workers, indigenous and vulnerable people as well as on structures or sites of
cultural and religious significance.
a) Land Acquisition
Permanent Land Acquisition
The Project is going to consume about 207 kanals of agricultural land, about 55
kanals of forest land and 172 of waste land, i.e. 45.09% of the agriculture, 37.4%
waste land and 11.9% of the forest land in the area. By and large this is proprietary
land. (Reference Figures-10.1 & 10.2)
Temporary Acquisition of Land
The contractors will require temporary acquisition of land for: Establishment of

aggregate quarries, Contractors camp and other facilities. It is estimated that about
25 kanals of cultivated land is required for established these structures.
b) Impacts on Communication
The surrounding of the Project areas communities will be affected during the construction
phase as follows:
During the construction phase the general mobility of the local residents and their
livestock in and around the project area is likely to be hindered. Likewise access to
the natural resource may be affected. This particularly applies to the women folk and
children.
Construction activities, particularly excavation and movement of haul truck and

machinery may disrupt the existing tracks leading from the valley access road to
settlements. This will limit the accessibility of the local population to the valley
access road.
10 - 24
During construction activities, traffic flow will be disturbed. The Jabori Shinkiari
road being partly be used for access between weir to power house for the
movement of construction material, there will be limited scope for providing diversion
tracks for the mobility of local and through traffic. This aspect needs to be carefully
handled in accordance with site specific conditions.
c) Impacts on Local Community/ Workforce and Community Resources
Usage of Communitys common resources like potable water, fuel wood etc. by
Contractor workforce may create conflicts between the community and the
Contractor.
Community will have to face the noise and dust hazards during the construction
activities.
The presence of outside construction workers inevitably causes some degree of

social disruption and even active disputes with the local community as a result of
social/cultural differences. This particularly relates to the disruption of the privacy of
women folk working in the fields or even the yards of their houses, should the house
lying at lower elevation than the working sites. Likewise the risk of theft of the
community assets by the Contractor workers and vice versa may occur.
The Contractor will prefer to work during the night hours. The night time working will
be having intrinsic problems relating to safety and noise hazards for the
communities and the workers.
d) Gender Issues
The rural women normally are actively participate in other outdoor socio-economic
activities such as livestock rearing, bringing of potable water, etc which may also be
affected by the project activities.
The induction of outside labor may create social and gender issues due to the
unawareness of local customs and norms. It will also cause hindrance to the mobility
of local women for working in the field, herding livestock, picking fuel wood, etc.
e) Indigenous and Vulnerable Households
During the social field survey of the project, no indigenous or vulnerable household
group of people was identified. So no impact on these people is envisaged due to
the implementation of the project.
f) Safety Hazards
Occurrence of accidents/incidents during the construction activities, particularly from

blasting and excavation activities is a common phenomenon. Safety of general
public residing at the top of the hill where blasting/excavation is to be carried will
10 - 25
particularly be at stake. The local people, particularly the children and women, may
get injuries or even fatalities.
Contractor staff while working at steep hilly slopes may slip and get injuries.
g) Relocation of Residential Unit & Public Infrastructure
The Project will disrupt one residential unit located close to the reservoir area. The total
population of the disrupted house is 12. The total covered area of this house is about 7
Marla (1,894 ft2). Detail of disrupted house has been shown in Table-10.15 and
Location in Figure-10.1.
There is a Water Supplies pipe which supply water from Ghoridakta to Deedal. The
diameter of the pipe is 3 inch; this will be submerging in the reservoir.
h) Religious, Cultural and Historical Sites
No historical or archeological site has been observed along the Project corridor.
a) Land Acquisition
Permanent Land Acquisition
The land required for the reservoir and other structures will be acquired in
accordance with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Temporary Land Acquisition
Land required for establishing contractors facilities including borrowing earth

material and dumping of excess spoil will be leased directly from private landowners
by the contractor. The provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 will not be
invoked under temporary land acquisition as the acquisition of the land will be on
short term basis and will be covered by short-term lease agreements between the
landowners and contractors. Rental terms will have to be negotiated to the
satisfaction of the landowners concerned. Given that land acquisition conflicts
between the contractors and landowners are unlikely. The staff of the SHYDO and
supervisory Consultants will monitor the process of restoration and ensure, through
the terms of the construction contracts, that landowners are compensated according
to the terms of the lease agreements, and the restoration actions agreed upon by
the contractors are duly carried out. The photo-documentation of the existing land
prior to temporary acquisition will be available which will be beneficial to resolve the
restoration conflicts between the landowner and contractor. Similarly, prior to the
start of work, Contractor will carry out base line survey for selecting the camp sites,
dumping sites, public and community/ private owned utilities, in conformity with the
requirements specified in IEE studies and obtain approval from the Supervisory
Consultants.
10 - 26
b) Impacts on Communication
Potential social conflict will be contained by implementing the measures listed below:
Two new concert bridges, one at weir site of the other at powerhouse site, will be
constructed which enhanced mobility between both banks of the river. More ever,
the contractor will ensure that the mobility of the local communities, particularly
women and children, and their livestock is not hindered by the construction activities.
Generally the contractor will avoid using the village tracks for hauling the
construction material. However, if it is unavoidable, the existing ones will be
widened, overlaid with shingle or surface treated to accommodate local as well as
contractors traffic.
c) Impacts on Local Community/ Workforce and Community Resources
The Contractor will be required to maintain close liaison with the local communities
to ensure that any potential conflicts related to common resource utilization for the
project purposes are resolved quickly.
In areas where potable water is scarce and where the people use spring water, the
contractor will make alternative arrangement in accordance with water requirement
for Contractors camp and construction activities.
Camps will be located at least 500 m away from the nearest local settlement to
avoid the contamination of community-owned water resources.
Approval from the local administration will be obtained before using the local water
resources by the Contactor.
d) Gender Issues
The Contractor will have to select the specific timings for the construction activities
particularly near the settlements, so as to cause least disturbance to the local
population particularly women considering their peak movement hours.
Contractor will take due care of the local community and sensitivity towards local
customs and traditions will be encouraged.
Contractor will warn the staff strictly not to involve in any un-ethical activities and to
obey the local norms and cultural restrictions particularly with reference to women.
During construction activities, if privacy of the nearby households is affected, the

Contractor will inform the house owner to make some parda arrangements.
Similarly, Contractor will have to take care as much as possible that the construction
activities should not affect the privacy particularly with reference to women.
e) Indigenous and Vulnerable Households
As referred earlier, no indigenous or vulnerable household group of people was

identified in or along the project corridor, so the ADB Policy will not be triggered.
10 - 27
f) Safety Hazards
Complying with the safety precautions for construction workers as per International
Labour Organization (ILO) Convention No. 62, as far as applicable to the project
contract.
The contractor will ensure that blasting is not carried out in the near vicinity of the
settlements and village tracks that are very frequently used. Here only excavators
will be used.
Blasting will be carried out during the fixed hours (preferably during the mid-day).
The timing will be made known to all the people within 500 m from the blasting site
in all directions. People, except those who actually light the fuse shall be evacuated
from the area of 200 m from the blasting site in all directions at least 15 minutes
before blasting.
Effective construction controls by the Contractor to avoid inconvenience to the locals

due to noise, smoke and fugitive dust. The contractor will frequently sprinkle water at
the work areas and haul tracks to avoid generation of fugitive dust. The frequency of
sprinkling will be determined by the weather condition. During long spell of hot and
dry weather the sprinkling will be done after 2 or 3 hour intervals.
Haul-trucks carrying concrete, aggregate, sand and earth fill materials will be kept
covered with tarpaulin to help contain construction materials being transported
between the sites.
Good relations with the local communities will be promoted by encouraging

Contractors to provide opportunities for skilled and unskilled employment to the
locals, as well as on-the-job training in construction for young people. Contractor
will restrict his permanent staff to mix with the locals to avoid any social problems.
Local vendors will be provided with regular business by purchasing campsite goods
and services from them.
The Contractor will warn the workers not to involve in any theft activities and if
anyone would involve in such type of activities, he will have to pay heavy penalty
and would be handed over to police. Similarly, at the time of employing, Contractor
has to take care that the workers should be of good repute. The Contractor camp
will be properly fenced and main gate will be locked at night with a security guard to
check the theft issues from community side.
Contractor will take care of the local community and sensitivity towards the local
customs and traditions, particularly in the context of privacy of women folk.
In case of night time working the Contractor will adopt the following measures:
It is desirable that the night-time working may be avoided at places where

settlements are very close to the construction sites.
10 - 28
If the above is unavoidable, the use of heavy machinery generating noise should be
avoided only the manual works or light machinery may be deployed.
No blasting will be carried out during the night time.
The Contractor will provide adequate light at the site and display florescent sign
boards at appropriate places for warning to the communities and drivers.
Take safety precautions for the workers and the local communities.
The Contractor will keep first aid boxes at the site and make availability of vehicle for
transporting the injured people to the hospital. This arrangement will also be made
even during the day time working.
The Contractor will share the plan and schedule of night time working with the
Supervision Consultants for approval.
Training of workers in construction safety procedures, environmental awareness,

equipping all construction workers with safety gadgets including safety boots,
helmets, gloves, and protective masks, and monitoring their proper and sustained
usage.
Contractor will ensure the provision of medicines, first aid kits, vehicle, etc. at the
campsite and working place.
Warning to local communities prior to blasting and to enhance blasting safety the
contractor will use protective devices, including wire containment, displaying warning
signs along the work site, blowing sirens, etc.
Prior to blasting thorough inspection will be conducted.
Safety lookouts will be built to prevent people and vehicles from passing at the time
of blasting.
Cordon off the work areas where necessary.
The storage of all solid waste shall be practiced so as to prevent the attraction,
harborage or breeding of insects or rodents, and to eliminate conditions harmful to
public health or which create safety hazards, odors, unsightliness, or public
nuisances.
g) Relocation of Private/Public Infrastructure
Houses will be compensated on replacement cost basis; that is given in Table-10.15

and proposed location for relocation is given in Figure-10.1.
The Water Supply pipe which will be relocated to a suitable place will cost
approximately Rs: 200,000.
h) Religious, Cultural and Historical Sites
As referred earlier, no relocation of religious structures is involved, so no mitigation

is required except that contractor will follow the prayer timing particularly at prayer of
Juma and the workforce will observe the sanctity of religious properties.
10 - 29
There are no archaeological sites located within the Project corridor and no impacts
on archaeological sites are envisaged. However, the Contractor will be required to
instruct the construction crews and site supervisors in archaeological site
recognition, conservation procedures, and temporary site protection.
10.8 Alternative Considered
In this context, the following options have been considered.
10.8.1 No Action
Pakistan is facing critical shortfall of electric energy since long, particularly during the last
few years. It has been estimated that during the last five years the annual power demand
has been increasing by 4.8% that is likely to increase by 8 to 10% by the end of this
decade.
With this scenario, Pakistan is forced to exploit every source of power generation including
hydro, oil, gas, coal, nuclear, wind, solar etc. Even realizing constraints in the public sector
investment and to take up the task on fast track, the Government of Pakistan framed a
policy in 1994 to attract private investors for power generation by using thermal resources.
This policy was revised in 2002 to include hydropower in private sector, which previously fell
under the jurisdiction of WAPDA but now SHYDO is also following the same policy to
increase hydroelectric generation in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa involving private sector to build
and operate powerhouse.
To cater for this gap of power supply and also to meet the future power demand, Pakistan is
in need of exploitation of all resources of power generation. Therefore, the option of No
Action cannot be adopted. This option will not only affect the domestic sector but also
hamper the development of industrial, commercial and agriculture sectors of Pakistan.
10.8.2 Alternative Resources of Power Generation
The available resources of power generation in Pakistan are hydro, natural gas, coal, to
some extent oil, wind in the coastal regions, nuclear and solar. Of these, hydro resources
are of the prime importance for Pakistan. It is not only due to the fact that hydropower is the
cheapest power generation source but also because the country is endowed with ample
hydro resources for power generation up to 40,000 MW, out of which only about 7,000 MW
has been exploited so far, which forms about 30% of the total power generation capacity of
the country while the remaining about 70% is thermal from oil, gas, coal and nuclear in the
descending order. Two decades back, the power generation capacity was almost in the
reverse order, hydropower contributing up to 70% and thermal about 30%. As a result of
this, the power generation cost has increased tremendously. This is because of the fact that
indigenous oil production is very low, the operation of oil-fired power plants are dependent
on rather expensive imported oil. Natural gas resources of Pakistan are currently facing
shortfall. Therefore, its further utilization for electric power generation will affect its domestic
and industrial use unless it is imported at high cost. The poor economy does not allow the
import of fossil fuels, particularly oil, on a large scale. Too much reliance on imported oil is
critical from energy security point of view.
10 - 30
In the light of this, the only option left with Pakistan is the exploitation of vastly available
renewable and cheap resource of hydro-energy. WAPDA has prepared a plan for
exploitation of this energy source under Vision 2025. As a follow up, a number of projects
have been undertaken both in public and private sectors.
10.8.3 Project Design/ Location Alternative
As referred in previous sections, the project will be located in a very narrow valley; therefore
there is very limited scope of alternative consideration for the layout of the major project
components.
The alignment of the tunnel will be determined by the fixation of the locations of weir axis
and powerhouse. As this structure will be underground, the environmental hazards will be
limited to the quantum of the excavated material that would need to be disposed off.
Depending upon the locations of the two terminal structures, the length of tunnel will slightly
vary resulting in change in the quantity of spoil material.
Detail of alternative is given in main IEE reports chapter 5.
10.9 Environmental Management Plan and Institutional Requirement
The environmental management plan and its institutional requirements have been
described in tabular form at Table-10.16. The table identifies the effects of the construction
and operation of different project components on various environmental parameters. It also
spells out mitigation/enhancement actions. The table also defines the responsibilities of
various actors, viz. Proponent, Contractor and the Engineer in the implementation and
monitoring of the mitigation actions.
Supervision and implementation of the EMP will be undertaken by SHYDO management in

conjunction with the proposed implementation specialists or supervisory consultant.
SHYDO will also obtain approvals from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa-EPA and then monitor the
project and forward monitoring reports on a regular basis to the Provincial EPA as per the
requirements of the Federal EPA regulations. This IEE and the EMP can form the basis of a
submission for environmental approval from the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa-EPA.
SHYDO will be responsible for ensuring that conditions are included in project construction
contract documents. It will also ensure that during the construction phase, environmental
mitigation measures, as per the EMP, are effective and are implemented. The EMP
implementation will be coordinated with Government Agencies such as Forest, Fisheries
and Wildlife Departments, for such activities as securing removal permits for trees.
As SHYDO does not yet have the expertise and capacity required for implementing the IEE
and Abbreviated Resettlement Plan, it will have to depend on additional external technical
assistance and will therefore hire the following additional expertise.
Purposed part time Implementation or Supervisory Consultants 1 (Environmental and

Resettlement Specialists) who will be hired directly by SHYDO, to provide technical
1
TORs and Cost will be decided later with M/S of SHYDO.
10 - 31
assistance in implementation of the Environmental Management & Monitoring Plan and

Abbreviated Resettlement Plan. Another part-time Consultant (External Monitoring1) to
conduct the external monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of the EMP and
resettlement activities for the project.
10.9.1 Environmental Monitoring Plan
This section provides a monitoring plan that identifies the roles and responsibilities of
project staff involved in environmental monitoring, and lists the parameters that will be used
in the monitoring process. (Table-10.17) The main objectives of construction phase
monitoring plans will be to:
Monitor the actual project impact on physical, biological and socio-economic

indicators. This will indicate the adequacy of the IEE in identifying and mitigating the
project adverse effects.
Recommend mitigation measures for any unforeseen impact or where the impact
level exceeds than that anticipated in the IEE.
Ensure compliance with legal and community obligations including safety on

construction sites.
Monitor the rehabilitation of borrow areas and the restoration of the construction
campsite as described in the EMP.
Ensure the safe disposal of excess construction materials.
The main objectives of monitoring during the operation phase will be to:
Appraise the adequacy of the IEE with respect to the projects predicted long-term
impacts on the corridors physical, biological and socioeconomic environment.
Evaluate the effectiveness of the mitigation measures proposed in the EMP, and
recommend improvements in the EMP, if required.
Monitor the survival rate of compensatory plantations carried out for loss of
vegetation by the project.
SHYDO will ensure two types of monitoring during the execution of the project.
(i) Compliance Monitoring - to ensure that proposed measures in the EMP are
adhered to, and (ii) Effects Monitoring - to establish baseline values for
environmental parameters such as air quality, water quality and noise levels. Given
the circumstances of the project, independent environmental monitoring consultant
already engaged for the ongoing project shall be asked to conduct the monitoring
program.
For social monitoring SHYDO will select independent monitoring agency to verify the
efficacy and ensure the transparency of land acquisition, compensation and resettlement
process carried out by SHYDO. The agency engaged for independent monitoring will report
10 - 32
their findings on a quarterly basis directly to the Project Coordinator, Deputy Director,
federal D/Environment and the Resettlement and Social Committee. In order to meet the
above objectives the following parameters need to be monitored:
Water Quality / Quantity
Air and Noise quality,
Soil Conservation, and
Sanitation and Waste Disposal
10.10 Abbreviated Resettlement Plan (ARP)
10.10.1 General
In accordance with established resettlement policy, if a project displaces less than 200*
persons (about 40-50 families) or even more than 200 persons are affected with minor
displacement, an Abbreviated Resettlement Plan instead of comprehensive Resettlement
Action Plan may suffice. The EA study of Jabori Hydropower Project indicates that only one
family comprising 12 members will be displaced in addition to minor effects on other families
due land taking, thus an Abbreviated Resettlement Plan (ARP) is suggested for the Project.
This is based on the socioeconomic profile of project area as depicted in Section 10.5.7.
10.10.2 Main Objective of Abbreviated Resettlement Plan
This ARP is designed to address all the limited impacts of the project. It provides an
analysis of the impacts identifies the nature and types of losses and establishes an
entitlement matrix as a guide to payments of compensation and resettlement benefits. It
also contains a budget, institutional arrangement for implementing the ARP, implementation
framework and monitoring arrangements. This has been described in the following sections
of the chapter.
10.10.3 Potential Effects of the Project
The area to be consumed by the Project structures, i.e. reservoir, channel, sand trap, power
house, and camps & colony and approach/access roads is given in Table-10.18 and also
shown in Figures-10.1 and 10.2.
The Project is going to affect lands of about 52 families i.e. villages Sacha Khurd (5 No.),
Deedal (14 No.), Giyar Sachan (2 No.), Upper bela (3 No.), Lower bela (8 No.), Kalawan (1
No), Granthali (12) and Kundi Sehri (7).Out of these, only 1 family will be losing residential
land, while the rest of 51 families will lose part of their cultivated or other land types.
A total of 45 households or families (230 persons), are non settler 2 category of the Jabori
village, will be affected by permanent land acquisition and 1 family (12 persons) who lose
their house as well as their land fall in resident owner category of Jabori village. Among
them 7 household (40 persons), of resident owner category, will also be affected by
2
Non settler refers to people whose residence is other than their impacted land.
10 - 33
temporary land acquisition for the project implementation. Table-10.19 & 10.20 depicts
detailed about project impacts on permanent land acquisition and project impacts on
temporary land acquisition.
The entire affected persons are losing agricultural land, waste land and forest land. These
affected persons have an average land holding size of 5 18 kanal, while land owners of
weir site are non-settlers and the land owners of power house site are resident owners. The
detail of land holding and affected trees in respect to their owners is given in Table-10.21
and Table-10.22. All the households losing lands are legal titleholders. There are no
squatter households who will be affected. The total loss of trees in the project area is 350 as
per the survey.
There is no vulnerable group 3 and no indigenous category of people that exists in the
project area so ADB policy is not triggered in this respect.
10.10.4 Land Acquisition Act (1894) and Practice in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
The Government of Pakistan and the four Provinces, including the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,
use the Land Acquisition Act of 1894 (the Act), with amendments, as the core legal
document for acquiring private land for public purposes. The process of land acquisition is
initiated by serving a preliminary notice under Section 4 of the Act by the District Revenue
Officer (DRO), acting as the Land Acquisition Collector (LAC), expressing the governments
intention to enter upon the identified private lands for surveying and soil-testing for a
specified public purpose. The next activity is carried out under Section 5, which involves
marking and measurement of the land and assessment of compensation. The final
declaration for possession of the selected portions/strips of the lands is issued under
Section 6 of the Act. Under this Act, only persons officially registered with the Revenue
Department as owners with the Land Revenue Department or who possess formal lease
agreements are considered eligible for land compensation. As per the provisions of the
Act, cash compensation is assessed (Section 5) on the basis of the latest five to three years
average registered land sale transfer rates, and is paid to the landowners for their lands
being acquired. However, there have been instances in the recent past of taking average
rates of the past one year, and even taking the recurrent rates. For land acquisition for this
Project, however, the current open-market rates / replacement value will be applied, as per
the ADB Resettlement Policy, and the process of land acquisition will be shortened by
replacing formal LAA methods with direct negotiations with the landowners and their village
elders.
10.10.4.1 ADB Policy on Involuntary Resettlement
The Involuntary Resettlement Policy of ADB addresses losses of land, resources, and
means of livelihood or social support systems which people suffer as a result of ADB
3
The groups of population are considered socially vulnerable comprises of (a) those that are below the poverty line (BPL); (b)
those who belong to scheduled castes (SC), scheduled tribes (ST); (c) female headed household (FHH); (d) elderly (above 65
year) and (e) disable persons
10 - 34
projects or project components. The Involuntary Resettlement Policy takes into

consideration social and economic impacts that are permanent or temporary and are:
Caused by acquisition of land and other fixed assets,
By change in the use of land, or
Restrictions imposed on land as a result of an ADB operation.
An affected person (AP) is one who experiences such impacts.
10.10.4.2 Main Differences between the Pakistans LAA 1894 and ADB Resettlement
Policy Guidelines
The following Table-10.23 shows the main differences between the Pakistani Land
Acquisition Act (1894) and the ADB Resettlement Policy and Guidelines.
10.10.4.3 Identification of Compensation Parameters
Affected people and communities will be fully compensated for their respective losses. The
following compensation parameters will be utilized:
Ideally the land for land option should be adopted but as no government land exists in
the area this option cannot be applied.
Cash compensation to be provided for land is to be based on current market

/replacement value to landowners (including women), plus 15% Compulsory
Acquisition Surcharge (CAS), as provided in the Pakistani Land Acquisition Act (LAA).
The provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 will not be invoked under temporary
land acquisition as the acquisition of the land will be on short term basis and will be
covered by short-term lease agreements between the landowners and contractors.
Rental terms will have to be negotiated to the satisfaction of the landowners
concerned. Given that there is no compulsory land acquisition conflicts between the
contractors and landowners are unlikely.
Cash compensation for loss of crops is based on market value of mature crops. If
sown or standing crops are damaged or uprooted, the eligible persons will be
compensated in cash for the loss of un-harvested crops, at the mature crop value to be
assessed on the basis of the local current market rates, regardless of the title or
tenurial status.
Compensation for loss of fruit-trees is based on the value of fruit for up to 10 years, to
be assessed at current market prices, regardless of the title or tenurial status.
10.10.5 Entitlement and Eligibility
The ADB Resettlement Policy/Guidelines require compensation for the lost assets at
replacement costs to both titled and non-titled landholders and resettlement assistance for
10 - 35
lost income and livelihoods. Table-10.24 provides a matrix of entitlements for various types
of losses and affected persons.
10.10.5.1 Compensation for Loss of Land, Standing Crops and Trees
Cash compensation to be provided for agricultural land is to be based on current market

/replacement value to title holders or traditional land rights plus 15% Compulsory
Acquisition Surcharge (CAS), as provided in the LAA. Tentative unit price of Agriculture
Land is Rs.200, 000/Kanal, for Waste Land is Rs.80, 000/Kanal and for Forest Land Rs.
150,000/Kanal.
For temporary land acquisition, cultivated land is leased out at Rs.50, 000 per kanal which
also includes value of crop produced on it.
Compensation for fruit trees (for up to 10 years) to be assessed at the rate of current market
prices. Estimated rate for shade trees are 1,000 Rs. /tree and for fruit trees are 1,200 Rs.
/tree.
10.10.5.2 Restoration of Damaged Community Infrastructure and Installations
The community infrastructure that may become damaged or deteriorate as a consequence

of the operation related to the project construction works will be restored to at least their
prior standards totally at the project cost, especially: Drinking water pipe will be relocated
and improved as a goodwill gesture towards the community. It is estimated that cost for
relocation for water supply pipe per foot is 400.
Two new concert bridge will be constructed, one at weir site and the other one at
powerhouse site. These will increase mobility between both banks of the river.
10.10.5.2 Relocation and Income Restoration Strategy
As referred earlier, the Project will disrupt only one house falling in the reservoir area. The
total population of the disrupted house is 12. The total covered area of this house is about 7
Marla (1894 ft2). Loss of residential structure: shifting allowance will be paid to the
household and affected people will be allowed to salvage materials from their demolished
structures. Residential structure will be compensated on replacement cost basis, estimated
rate for per square feet is 491 and detailed is given in Table-10.15 and location for
resettlement is shown in Figure-10.1
As no income generating businesses will be affected by the project, no additional income

restoration needs were mentioned by the affected people during the consultation meetings.
On site job opportunities however, will be offered to the community during the construction
work and affected households will be given preference in employment opportunities.
10.10.6 Institutional Responsibilities and Monitoring Arrangements
10.10.6.1 Institutional Arrangements
SHYDO will be the executing agency (EA) for this Project. A Project Directorate, headed by
a Project Director, will be established in SHYDO Regional Office in Peshawar, which will be
10 - 36
responsible for the overall execution of the Project. The PD will recruit and appoint local
NGO/s as required for resettlement activities. The EA will depute an Executive Engineer
level officer as the Deputy Director (DD) in charge of the land acquisition and resettlement
operations, who will report to the Project Director. He/she will work in close coordination
with the respective field-based offices and Project NGO/s on the day to day activities of the
resettlement plan implementation.
The DD through the field offices, District Land Acquisition Collector/s (LACs) in Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa and Project NGO will execute and monitor the progress of the work. He will
ensure coordination between the relevant departments, NGO, the Grievance Redress
Committee (GRC) and the Projects affected people (APs). In addition, the Project
Directorate will establish environment and social assessment units that will also be
responsible for periodic internal monitoring and evaluation of the Project activities, including
abbreviated resettlement pan implementation.
10.10.6.2 Land Acquisition Organization
The Land Acquisition Collectors (LACs) are formally responsible for acquiring the identified
land/s from the respective landowners and paying the due compensation money to the
affected landowners according to procedures laid down in Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and
the Entitlement Matrix (Table-10.24). Once acquired and the compensation paid to the APs,
LACs will hand over possession of the acquired lands to SHYDO for utilization in the project
implementation.
Thus, as far as the land acquisition part of the RP is concerned, there exists a well
organized system and time-tested process in Pakistan. However, with respect to other
resettlement-related activities, the government officials lack the necessary know-how, as
there exists so far no formal resettlement policy. Accordingly, SHYDO has no institutional
mechanisms for resettlement planning, implementation and monitoring & evaluation within
the present organizational set-up. Thus, the Project will have to depend mainly on external
technical assistance for implementing the resettlement-related activities, side by side with
their internal institutional capacity building in their Department for future self-sufficiency.
This will be done by hiring the following additional expertise:
a) A Resettlement Specialist is being proposed in the team of Project Supervision
Consultants to provide technical assistance in resettlement planning, implementation and

internal monitoring and evaluation;
b) A Local Panel of Experts is being proposed to conduct periodic monitoring and

evaluation of implementation of the ARP activities.
10.10.6.3 Grievances Redress Mechanism
Various provisions under the Land Acquisition Act (1894) enable aggrieved Affected
Persons (APs) at different stages of the land acquisition process to represent their cases to
the Land Acquisition Collector (LAC) or even refer to the court of law for redressal and seek
10 - 37
higher rate of compensation. However, the major grievances that might require mitigations
include:
a) APs not enlisted;
b) Losses not identified correctly;
c) Compensation/assistance inadequate or not as per entitlement matrix;
d) Dispute about ownership;
e) Delay in disbursement of compensation/assistance; and
f) Improper distribution of compensation/assistance in case of joint ownership.
Thus, the main objective of the grievance redressal procedure will be to provide a
mechanism to mediate conflict and cut down on lengthy litigation, which often delays such
projects. It will also provide people who might have objections or concerns about their
assistance, a public forum to raise their objections and through conflict resolution, address
these issues adequately.
The project will establish a Grievance Redressal Committee for each contract, headed by
the District LAC in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa with two or three local councilors including at least
one women councilor, local NGO/CBO and officials of SHYDO. The DD or his nominee, a
field-based Assistant Engineer will be the member-secretary of the committee and shall act
as the Projects Grievance Officer. GRC will meet at least once a month and the decision of
GRC would be final. The Committee shall deliver its decision within four to six (4-6) weeks
of registration of the case. The functions of the Grievance Redressal Committee shall be to:
a) Provide support to APs on problems arising out of their land/property acquisition

and/or eviction from the land;
b) Record the grievance of the APs, categorize and prioritize the grievances that need
to be resolved by the Committee; and
c) Report to the aggrieved parties about the developments regarding their grievances
and the decision of the Project authorities.
10.10.6.4 General Implementation schedule
The land acquisition is a complex and lengthy process in Pakistan; it is expected to

formalize the acquisition quickly due to priority given to the Project by the government.
Generally, the process of land acquisition in Pakistan takes about a year The SHYDO
should adopt the implementation schedule given in Table-10.25 to ensure the quick land
acquisition process
10.10.7 Monitoring and Evaluation
The SHYDO through EA will be responsible for internal monitoring of the resettlement
through their field office. The Resettlement Specialist will provide necessary technical
10 - 38
assistance in implementation and monitoring the temporary land acquisition. He will ensure
the coordination between the relevant departments, the Grievance Redress Committee and
the Projects affected people.
In addition, a part-time Monitoring Consultant will be responsible for independent external

monitoring. He will evaluate the satisfaction of the affected people regarding their
compensation for their temporarily affected land. Towards the end of the project both
internal and external monitors will make sure that the farmland will be restored properly and
handed over to the original owners. Both consultants will submit a final report to
SHYDO/ADB.
10.10.7.1 Indicators for Monitoring and Evaluation
The following will be considered as the basis for indicators in monitoring and evaluation of
the project:
Socio-economic conditions of the APs in the post-resettlement period
Communications and reactions from Aps on entitlements, compensation and options
Alternative developments and relocation timetables etc.
Changes in housing and income levels
Valuation of property
Grievance procedures
Disbursement of compensation and
Level of satisfaction of APs in the post resettlement period
10.11 Environmental and Resettlement Costs
Environmental costs are based on the expenditures required to neutralize the impacts, due
to the construction of the project, on the environmental settling, social aspect and ecology of
the surrounding area. Total environmental cost is 68.20 million rupees which comprises the
Compensation for trees plus Afforestation cost, Monitoring cost and Resettlement cost as
narrated in Table-10.26.
10.11.1 Compensation for Trees plus Afforestation Cost
The main components covered in Afforestation cost is compensation for loss of trees and
re-plantation of trees.
10.11.2 Environmental Monitoring Cost
Monitoring cost mainly consists of the equipment required for checking and testing of water
quality, air quality and noise levels during construction phase of the project. In addition
fisheries management plan is also included. But no mitigation is being suggested for the
10 - 39
fragmentation of fish population above the weir and beyond the weir, because there is no
fish population reported to migrate upstream and no fish ladder or fish way is being
recommended, as a result no cost for fisheries management plan is described.
10.11.3 Resettlement Cost Estimates
The replacement cost of land is based on current market prices. The market value was
assessed on the basis of recent transactions and consultations with the affected persons
and other community members as in most cases transactions are verbal and not
documented.
10.12 Conclusions and Recommendations
10.12.1 Conclusions
This report presents the results of an Initial Environmental Examination and Social Impact
Assessment of the proposed Jabori Hydropower Project (8 MW). Jabori Hydropower Project
is falling in the IEE category according to the provision of Pak-EPA regulation (SRO 339
(I)/2000) which states that an IEE is required for Hydroelectric project less than 50 MW.
Construction of Jabori Hydropower Project will bring following impacts in the area;
Beneficial Impacts:
Hydropower is a clean and renewable source of energy and avoids contributions to

pollution loads; hence, it is environment friendly.
Creation of an impoundment of relatively shallow depth will be helpful for development of

fishery.
The construction of the project will open job opportunities for the local people. This will
help in raising their living standard.
The provision of electricity in the area will bring prosperity and improve the living
standards of the local people.
The creation of reservoir will open the area for tourism which will again be
economically beneficial for the local communities.
Resettlement impact is very low. Because, only 1 residential structure is falling in

project area and need resettlement.
Adverse Impacts:
The Project is going to consume about 232 kanals of agricultural land and 55 kanals of
forest land.
The impact on vegetation is not high. About 200 shade trees and 150 fruit trees have
to be cut.
10 - 40
The water supply pipe which supplies water from Ghoridakta to Deedal. It is liable to
submergence in the reservoir and therefore would be relocated higher up.
The construction activities will affect the air quality and cause noise related hazards,
which will be of concern, especially at the Power House where some settlements are
close to the construction site.
Depletion of the river flows when the water is diverted through Power Tunnel will affect
the population of villages falling in the river stretch between the Weir and the
Powerhouse.
10.12.2 Recommendations
It is concluded that the project activities at certain sites will have adverse effects of low to
medium level however, the overall environmental impact rating is low adverse. The project
adequately meets the prescribed environmental standards.
Hence, there will not be any permanent effects of the project on the social environment.
However, detailed socio-economic survey of the study area has been caring out and
included in the preceding chapter as well as in Part B, later section of the chapter.
An environmental management plan has been prepared to control the adverse impacts
associated with the construction and operation of the project. It is considered that through
good site management during construction and operation, the management of
environmental risks and health and safety management, the potential adverse impacts can
be mitigated to levels that are not significant.
SHYDO as the Implementing Agency will develop its internal capacity to implement and
monitor the measures in the EMP. This has been designed into the project by requiring the
setting up of an Environmental Monitoring Unit in SHYDO and the appointment of
environmental & resettlement specialists and the hiring of an independent monitor.
10 - 41
TABLES
Table-10.1a
Detail of Flora in the District
Sr.
Scientific Name Vernacular Name
No.
1 Pinus roxberghii Pine
2 Dalbergia sisso Shisham
3 Cedrus deodara Deodar
4 Melea azedarie Bakain
5 Punica granatum Daroon
6 Zyziphus jajuba Beri
7 Melia azedarach Bakain
8 Olea cuspidate Kahu
9 Liriodendron tulipifera Poplar
10 Diospyros digyna Persimmon
11 Robinia pseudoacacia Rubania
12 Malus domestica Apple
13 Prunus persica Peach
14 Pyrus boissieriana Pear
15 Prunus armeniaca Apricot
16 Sect. Juglans. Walnut
17 Acacia nilotica Kikar
18 Malus domestica Apple
Table-10.1b
Detail of Flora in Project Area
Shade Trees %
Shisham 10
Deodar 17
Drawa 29
Pine 10
Beeri 5
Kikar 3
Poplar 10
Rubania 5
Bakain 12
Fruit Trees
Apple 2
Walnut 11
Peach 28
Pear 24
Persimmon 1
Apricot 34
Table-10.2 a
List of Wild Fauna in the District
Sr.
Scientific Name Local Name
No.
1 Capre falconeri Markhur
2 Porous impejanus Monal
3 Ovis Orientalis Urial
4 Selenaretos, thibetanus Himalyan bear
5 Panthera pardus Leopard
6 S.senegalensis Little brown dove
7 Canis lupus pallipes Wolf
8 Rhesus Monkey Maaca mulatta
9 Vulpes bengalensis Fox
10 Streptopelia chinensis Spotted dove
11 Coraciiformes King fisher
12 Felis silvestris Wild cat
13 Sylvilagus brasiliensis Forest rabbit
Table-10.2 b
Detail of Domestic Fauna in Project Area
Sr.
Scientific Name Local Name
No.
1 Anoa spp Buffalo
2 Caprahircus Goat
3 Equus asinus Donkey
4 Equus Cahallus Horse
5 Equus spp Mule
6 Canis spp Dog
7 Gallus domesticus Domestic Chicken
8 Columbia livia Pigeon
Table- 10.3
Temperature and Rainfall Data for the Period 1961-90
Mean Temperature (oC) Precipitation Relative

Month Maximum Minimum (millimeters) Humidity (%)
January 14.0 2.0 94.9 67.1
February 15.4 3.9 153.5 63.4
March 19.5 7.6 188.6 59.9
April 25.3 12.6 134.3 54.3
May 31.0 17.2 77.0 43.3
June 35.3 21.0 98.4 42.2
July 32.3 21.3 359.4 67.3
August 31.3 20.6 292.5 75.1
September 30.9 17.1 100.8 65.8
October 27.5 11.5 44.7 58.9
November 21.9 6.2 45.9 62.1
December 16.0 2.9 81.2 68.5
Annual 25.1 12.0 1,680.0 60.7
Source: Data Processing Centre, Pakistan Meteorological Department, Karachi.
Table-10.4
Age Composition
Age Group (Years) No. %

0-5 47 10.90
5-10 71 16.47
10-20 90 20.88
20-30 75 17.40
30-40 55 12.76
40-50 47 10.90
50-60 19 4.41
60 & Above 27 6.26
Total 431 100.00
Table-10.5
Household Assets
# Per
Type Per unit Price(Rs.)
Household
Radio 1 1,862
TV 1 8,750
Telephone / Cell 2 7,441
Vehicle :Type 0.1 568,824
Household Accessories 0.01 10,000
Table-10.6
Detail of Social Amenities in Project Area
Response about Amenity's
% of
Amenities Efficiency
Household
Excellent Good Poor
Water Supply 87.6 41.2 58.8 0.0
Drinking Water Points 75.2 29.3 70.7 0.0
Washing / Bathing Points 80.0 22.4 53.9 23.7
Primary School (Boys / Girls) 87.6 15.2 84.8 0.0
Secondary /Higher School (Boys / Girls) 1.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Dispensary / BHU 1.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Hospital 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Mosque 89.5 70.1 24.7 5.2
Market 1.9 0.0 16.7 83.3
Graveyard 90.5 33.3 57.1 9.5
Telephone Connection 33.3 13.8 79.3 6.9
Electricity Connection 89.5 12.2 53.7 34.1
Disposal of Solid Waste 53.3 12.2 49.0 38.8
Disposal of Waste Water 46.7 13.0 37.0 50.0
Bridge Crossing 59.0 0.0 40.0 60.0
Water Mill 1.0 16.7 0.0 83.3
Irrigation Scheme 1.9 0.0 12.5 87.5
Hydel Power Generators 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Access Road 5.7 0.0 25.0 75.0
Table-10.7
Land and Land Use
Land Type Avg. per House Hold (Kanal) %Land type
Cultivable Area 18.1 15.6
Area Cropped 10.4 8.9
Grazing Land 18.9 16.2
Waste Land 5.2 4.4
Forested Area 29.3 25.1
Meadows 28.3 24.3
Mountains 6.3 5.4
Table-10.8
Livestock in Households
Type Avg. # Per HH Avg. Per unit Price
Goat 1.63 6,310
Sheep 0.25 7,792
Cow 0.19 38,889
Buffalo 0.63 65,902
Horse 0.05 24,000
Mule 0.11 5,000
Donkey 0.02 15,000
Poultry 13.06 267
Table-10.9
Perceptions of Respondents on Project Impacts
Categories Increase (%) Decrease (%) No Affect (%)
Employment Opportunities 100 0 0
Income Generation Activities 93.8 1.0 5.2
Unemployment 2.1 89.7 0
Living Standard 94.8 0.0 0
Facilities / Amenities 93.8 2.1 0
Electrification 90.7 3.1 0
Agriculture 59.8 27.8 0
Housing 69.1 23.7 0
Forestation 53.6 28.9 0
Deforestation 32.0 25.8 0
Table-10.10
Record of Scoping Sessions
Sr.
Date Venue Participants Concerns Action/Response
No.
Team introduction, Project briefing, discuss Security All possible efforts will peruse.
issues and social values of the area. The project will provide unskilled jobs during the
Affected villages should be converted into model construction phase and limited number of job in
villages by model village schemes. operational phase as well.
Meeting with local 35
1 30.4.2009 As main source of income is agriculture in our village, As there is only one residential structure being
jirga (weir site)
which is being affected by the reservoir. An alternate affected or relocation aspect is negligible so
source of income should be managed. abbreviated resettlement plan is envisages
Resettlement Action Plan must be disclosed before rather than RAP.
switching the construction.
The river water is used for washing clothes by The Proponent will make arrangement during
women, watering livestock and bathing during operation of the project for release of water
summer. Almost all the households keep livestock. from weir to meet the demand of downstream
So when the water will be diverted into the Power reach of the river.
Tunnel, there will be no water in the river main
stream. The Project should make substitute
Meeting with people 12
1.5.2009 arrangement.
2. of upper Bella. (weir
Majority of households in the village have septic N/A
site)
tanks and soakage pits. Some household dispose
off wastewater into their fields. So there is no
chance of pollution of river water from the
wastewater. N/A
Fishing is very rare in the village, and is only
recreational not commercial.
The village Sacha Kalan, Deedal, Giyar Sachan, 0.134 m3/ s are the recommended mean monthly
Upper bela, Kalawan and Lower bela along the ecological or residual flow .The project has
Meeting with Nazim
banks of river use water for washing clothes, adopted this figure for energy calculation of the
UC and other people 20
3.5.2009 watering livestock and bathing. Therefore, one gate project.
3 of Granthali Village
at the dam may be kept open for regular flow in the
at Nazims house.
river. This is because the water from springs does
(power house site)
not meet the requirement, particular when they are
dried during summer.
3.5.2009 Meeting with local 12 Suggested that water may be made available from Agreed
4
people of Gran Thali the project for irrigation purposes.
Sr.
Date Venue Participants Concerns Action/Response
No.
and Kundi Sheri near
power house site
Description of the project. Fair and early compensation given to the actual
At shop of Bhogar 7 As land of our villages is being affected by this affectees.
5 15.8.2009
Mang. project, and we are sacrificed, therefore they were
showing fears of getting no compensation.
All the labor should be hired from affected villages. The project will provide unskilled jobs during the
construction phase and limited number of job in
operational phase as well.
At house of 15
6 17.8.2009 Free electricity should be provided to affected This will be negotiating later with SHYDO M/s.
Namberdar.
villages.
Land Compensation will depend on current
The rate of land is 10 hundred thousand per Kanal. market rates.
Local labor should be hired when start construction. All possible efforts will peruse.
Meeting with All the people were in support of this project except
coordinator of road 8 some ones.
7 18.8.2009 construction at Parks play grounds and other recreational spot
Jabori should be established. Only one house is affected.
It should be tried to save our houses
We accept this project only on agricultural land. All possible efforts will peruse.
Project description and perception. All the people This pipe will be relocated and if required
Meeting with people were in support of this project except some ones. alternative source of water would be arranged.
of Kundisheri Besides our house and land, water pipe is also being
25
8 19.8.2009 proposed location of affected. An alternate source of water should be Only one house is affected.
power house staff arranged.
colony It should be tried to save our houses. All possible efforts will peruse.
We accept this project only on agricultural land.
Project description and briefing. For Job placement, preference will be given to the
Meeting with people
An alternate source of income should be managed. affectees of the project.
of Kundisheri at 15
We are not ready to provide any data relating to our
9 19.8.2009 proposed road
houses, because we will not allow including All possible efforts will peruse.
construction sits
residential land for reservoir.
It should be tried to save our houses.
Table -10.11
Project Impact Matrix
Table-10.12
Estimated Mean Monthly Flows-1969 to 2008 (m3/sec)
Recommended Mean
Months Mean Monthly Flow
Monthly Ecological Flow
Jan 4.39 0.129

Feb 5.39 0.133
Mar 7.04 0.139
Apr 7.54 0.141
May 6.37 0.136
Jun 5.29 0.132
Jul 6.70 0.138
Agu 7.08 0.139
Sep 5.30 0.132
Oct 4.51 0.130
Nov 4.02 0.128
Dec 4.11 0.128
Mean 5.65 0.134
Table-10.13
WHO Guideline Values for Community Noise in Specific Environments
Leq* Lmax,**
Specific Environment
(dB) (dB)
Outdoor living area 55 -
School class rooms and pre-schools (indoors) 35 -
School, playground (outdoors) 55 -
Hospital, ward rooms (indoors) 30 40
Hospital, treatment rooms (indoors) 1 -
Industrial, commercial, shopping and traffic areas
70 110
(indoors and outdoors)
*Level equilibrium
* *Maximum level
Table-10.14
Relative Sound Levels
Sound Level
Activity
dB(A)
40 50 Rural Area
55 Quiet background conversation
60 General office
72 Passenger car @ 60 km/hr at 7 meters distance
85 Heavy diesel lorry @ 40 km/hr at 7 meters distance
90 Hazard to hearing from continuous exposure
95 Pneumatic drill (un-silenced) at 7 meter distance
Table-10.15
Detail of Residential Unit
Covered Estimated
Name of Affected Number of Nature of Year of
area cost at
Person(Head of Household) Persons Construction construction
(Sq.ft) present*
M.Yousaf s/o Alam Din 12 Kacha Pacca 1,894 2008 929,954

*Excluded 15% CAS but includes land rates
Table-10.16
Environmental Management Plan
Responsibilities
Resources Impacts Description Receptors Mitigation
Implementation Supervision
Constructional Phase
A. Land 1. Land * It is estimated that the project will Land Owner/ *Cash compensation for acquired land Land Revenue SHYDO
Resources Acquisition involve acquisition of about 207 Local Peoples at replacement value. Department
kanals of agricultural land, 172 of
waste land and about 55 kanals of *For temporary land acquisition, rental
forest land. While temporary land terms will have to be negotiated to the
acquisition involves 25 kanals of satisfaction of the landowners
agricultural land .By and large this is concerned. Tentatively Rs.
the proprietary land. 50,000/kanal is estimated.
2. Land *Borrow or excavated material will Land owner The top 30 cm of the plough layer will Contractor SHYDO
Productivity and cause the loss of some of the fertile be stripped and stockpiled for
Use plough layer and a drop in the redressing the land after the required
elevation thus resulting in the borrow material has been removed.
decrease of land productivity. In case deep ditching is carried out, the
top 1 m layer of the ditching will
stripped and stockpiled.
3. Soil Erosion *If hillside or valley side slopes are Local *Good engineering practices will help Contractor Supervision
and Land Sliding left unprotected these will be subject Communities control soil erosion both at construction Consultant,
to a natural weathering and become sites and in peripheral areas, Environmental
increasingly prone to soil erosion and particularly in borrow and dumping Engineer,
land sliding. Soil erosion may also areas and a long haul tracks. SHYDO
occur at quarry areas, if unmanaged
blasting is carried out.
*The plantation, for slope protection,
*The reduction in vegetative cover will with deep root system for anchoring the
reduce the binding capacity of soil soil material and growth of bushes and
and enhanced erosion. creeping grasses having capability to
protect the slope against pitting from
rain water.
4. Soil Land may be contaminated by the The contractor will be required to train Contractor EPA s
Contamination spillage of materials like fuels, its workforce in storage and handling of Environmental
solvents, oils, paints and other materials like furnace oil, diesel, petrol Engineer,
construction chemicals and concrete. and chemicals, etc., that can potentially SHYDO
cause soil contamination.
Responsibilities
B. Water 1. Depletion of There is no water channel or any other Aquatic *0.134 m3/ s are the recommended Contractor SHYDO,
Resources the Water structure exists between this reach Ecosystem mean monthly ecological or residual EPA s
which divert Siran River. flow. Environmental
Engineer,
Local water supplies through the Local As per Local Government Act, the Contractor Local
springs may be affected due to Communities contractor will seek approval from the Government,
implementation of project, both in local government for exploitation of the SHYDO
quantity as well as quality. water resources.
2. Use of Local *If waste material is not properly Local Peoples, *Wastewater effluent from contractors Contractor EPA s
Water Supplies & disposed of, seepage of polluted Domestic workshops and equipment washing- Environmental
3. Contamination water during monsoon season will Fauna yards will be passed through Engineer,
of Surface and pollute surface as well as gravel/sand beds to remove oil/grease SHYDO
Ground Water groundwater quality. contaminants before discharging it into
Resources natural streams.
*Similarly, the wastewater effluent from

the campsite will be treated before
disposal into a stream. According to
local laws, the BOD 5 concentration in
sewage must be brought down to less
than 80 mg/l before being discharged
into a natural stream with a capacity to
dilute the effluent further by 10 times.
C .Ambient air 1.Dust Smoke *The emission or dust from the All Biotic *Regular spraying of water should be Contractor Monitoring
Quality and other batching plant or construction receptor undertaken to minimize the dust Consultant,
Pollutants from machinery and batching plant can be pollution SHYDO
Plants & very harmful for the site worker and
Equipments the local population. *All vehicles, machinery, equipment
and generators used during
construction activities will be kept in
good working condition to minimize the
exhaust emissions.
*Proper PPE should be issued to the

site worker and make sure the worker
wears the PPE properly during working
on site.
Responsibilities
*Cutting and burning trees or shrubs for
fuel shall be prohibited.
2.Smoke from *Smoke from burning of waste Nearby *Cutting and burning trees or shrubs for Contractor Monitoring
Burning of Waste material or firewood communities fuel shall be prohibited. Consultant,
Material or SHYDO
Burning *Gas Cylinders should be used in the
Firewood labour camp for cooking purposes.
D. Noise 1. Noise pollution *Construction activities particularly Adjacent All working activities should be Contractor EPA s
blasting site near the powerhouse communities restricted within the allowed day time Environmental
area could generate noise and disturb and domestic particularly for blasting. Engineer,
the natural habitat. Fauna Supervision
Follow Pak-EPA and WHO guideline Consultant
values for community noise in specific and SHYDO
environment.
E. Biological 1.Impact on Flora *Proposed project will impact about Flora and *It is estimated that against cutting of Contractor Forest
Environment 350 trees and during construction and owner of trees about 350 trees SHYDO will make a Department,
operational activities which includes provision of compensatory plantation at SHYDO
Contractors workers may damage the ratio of 1:3 with the help of local
the vegetation and trees forest department. As such, the total
compensatory plantation comes to
about 1050 trees more ever to
minimize the impacts on flora.
*Relevant contract clauses will be

included to control cutting of
trees/vegetation.
2.Impacts on There will be impacts on the Domestic *Blasting and other noise generating Contractor EPA s
Fauna mammals and reptiles of the project Fauna activities will not be carried out during Environmental
area as well as along the area of the night. Engineer,
project influence during the SHYDO
constructional activities, viz. *Hunting, poaching and harassing of
excavation, blasting, access roads, wild animals will be strictly prohibited
movement of labor, carriage of goods and Contractor will be required to warn
and machinery to various sites. its labour accordingly.
Unmanaged blasting activities may

harm birds.
Responsibilities
3. Impact on *Birds will migrate from the project Avian Fauna Staff working on the project should be Contractor EPA s
Avian Fauna area due to the activities mentioned given clear orders, not to shoot, snare Environmental
above for fear of being hunted/ or trap any bird. Engineer,
trapped. If possible nests of bird, on trees need SHYDO
to be uprooted, be shifted to other
nearby trees.
4.Impact on *There is no definite record about fish Downstream *The weir intake structure will be Contractor EPA s
Aquatic is available however diversion will Ecosystem designed and constructed to allow the Environmental
3
Ecosystem impact on aquatic ecosystem. minimum mean monthly 0.134 m /s Engineer,
(month wise detail is given in Table SHYDO
10.12) of water flow to always be
maintained in the Siran River for the
maintenance of riparian as well as
aquatic ecosystem of downstream.
F. Social 1. Impacts on *Effect on general mobility. Local people *The contractor will ensure that the Contractor SHYDO
Environment Local mobility of the local communities,
Communities/ particularly women and children and
Work force their livestock is not hindered by the
construction activities.
*Accessibility of the local population to *The contractor will provide crossing

the valley access road. points at the project structure specially
power channel area at appropriate
places.
*Community will have to face the Local *The contractor will ensure that blasting Contractor SHYDO
noise and dust hazards. Communities is not carried out in the near vicinity of
the settlements and village tracks that
are very frequently used. Here only
excavators will be used.
*Effective construction controls by the

Contractor to avoid inconvenience to the
locals due to noise, smoke and fugitive
dust. The contractor will frequently
sprinkle water at the work areas and
haul tracks to avoid generation of
fugitive dust. The frequency of sprinkling
will be determined by the weather
Responsibilities
condition. During long spell of hot and
dry weather the sprinkling will be done
after 2 or 3 hour intervals.
The presence of outside construction All social The Contractor will be required to Contractor SHYDO
workers inevitably causes some Components maintain close liaison with the local
degree of social disruption. communities to ensure that any
potential conflicts related to common
resource utilization for the project
purposes are resolved quickly.
The night time working will be having Social or It is desirable that the night-time Contractor SHYDO
intrinsic problems relating to safety Biological working may be avoided at places
and noise hazards for the Components where settlements are very close to the
communities. construction sites.
The Contractor will share the plan and

schedule of night time working with the
Supervision Consultants for approval.
2.Gender Issues *The rural women normally are Gender part of The Contractor will have to select the Contractor SHYDO
actively participate in other outdoor Community specific timings for the construction
socio-economic activities such as activities particularly near the
livestock rearing, bringing of potable settlements, so as to cause least
water, etc which may also be affected disturbance to the local population
by the project activities. particularly women considering their
peak movement hours.
*The induction of outside labor may *Contractor will warn the staff strictly
create social and gender issues due not to involve in any un-ethical
to the unawareness of local customs activities and to obey the local norms
and norms and cultural restrictions particularly with
reference to women.
3.Indigenous and no indigenous or vulnerable N/A N/A N/A N/A
Vulnerable household group of people was
Households identified
4.Safety Hazards Occurrence of accidents/incidents Construction Complying with the safety precautions Contractor SHYDO
during the construction activities. Crew for construction workers as per
International Labour Organization (ILO)
Convention No. 62, as far as applicable
to the project contract.
Responsibilities
5.Relocation of The acquisition of land will cause N/A Houses will be compensated on Land Revenue SHYDO
Private Houses/ disruption to a house. replacement cost basis; that is given in Department
Community Table:10.15
Infrastructure There is a water supply pipe which is Use good engineering practices for the Contractor SHYDO
likely to submerge in the reservoir. relocation of water supply pipe to a
suitable place.
6.Religious, N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cultural and No historical or archeological site has
Historical Sites been observed within the project area
of influence.
Operational Phase
A. Land There is no major adverse impact on Land Resource on during operation of the project.
Resource
B. Water 1. Powerhouse *Powerhouse generator could Nearby Follow Pak-EPA and WHO guideline Environmental SHYDO,
Resource generate noise and disturb the natural values for community noise in specific Engineer EPA.
generator community
habitat. environment.
1. Diverting water *Reduced water flow in river impairing Downstream *0.134 m3/ s is the recommended Environmental SHYDO,
from weir to agricultural activities of population. Ecosystem mean monthly ecological or residual Engineer and EPA.
power channel to flow which also covers river water Supervision
power tunnel. *Reduced water flow will affect the usage for the community as well. Consultant
ecology of river.
C. Biological There is no adverse impact on human resource on during operation of the project.
Resources
D. Human There is no major adverse impact on human resource on during operation of the project.
Table-10.17
Environmental Monitoring Plan
(To be implemented through hired consultants, overall responsibility of SHYDO)
Sr. Items Project Phase Parameters Frequency Location

No.
1. Water Quality Construction pH, BOD, COD, TSS, TDS Once every month Before and after treatment from
and Operational each septic tank.
Phase
2. Water related Construction Identification of water related Three times a year Labour camps and colonies.
diseases and Operational diseases, adequacy of local
Phase vector control and curative
measure etc.
3. Noise Construction Equivalent noise level as per Once in three At major construction sites
and Operational NEQS of PAK- EPA months
Phase
4. Air quality Constructional SPM, SO 2 , and NO x Once every season At 40m radius of Batching Plant
Phase (determine the
dominate air direction and carry out
monitoring at downstream of air
flow)
5. Soil Operational Oil and grease As per occurrence of Two selected locations in
Phase spills contractors equipment yards as
identified by the supervision
consultant
Note: Environmental Management and Monitoring Cost is Describes in Table 10.26.

Table-10.18
Land Required by the Project Structures
Forest /Grazing
Cultivated land Waste land Total
land
Project Structures
Land Land Land Land
% % % %
(kanal) (kanal) (kanal) (kanal)
Reservoir and Channel 104 44.8 169.4 98.5 30 54.5 303.4 66.1
Sand Trap 0 0.0 0.6 0.3 0 0.0 0.6 0.1
Access Road 1 0.4 2 1.2 0 0.0 3 0.7
Camps and Colony 25 10.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 25 5.4
Power House etc. 102 44.0 0 0.0 25 45.5 127 27.7
TOTAL LAND REQUIRED 232 172 55 459
Table-10.19
Project Impacts on Permanent Land Acquisition in Jabori Town
No. No.
Type of Impact Residence of Affected People of of Displacement
HH APs
No displacement only land is
Settlement Sacha Khurd* 5 28
affected
Settlement Deedal* 14 80
affected
Settlement Giyar Sachan* 2 10
affected
Loss of Land
Settlement Upper bela* 3 18
affected
Settlement Granthali 13 58
affected
Settlement Lower bela* 8 36
affected
Loss of One Displacement as well as
Village Jabori 1 12
Residential Unit land is affected
24 trees affected in
Settlement Sacha Khurd* - -
Settlement Sacha Khurd
Settlement Deedal* - -
Settlement Deedal
Settlement Giyar Sachan* - -
Settlement Giyar Sachan
Loss of trees 01 trees affected in
Settlement Upper bela* - -
Settlement Upper bela
Settlement Lower bela* - -
Settlement Lower bela
244 trees are affected in
Village Granthali - -
Granthali
Water Supply Relocating of Water Supply

Ghoridakta to Deedal
Pipe - - Pipe
Total 46 242
* Owners residence is in this locality while affected land is in project Area (Jabori village.)
Table-10.20
Project Impacts on Temporary Land Acquisition
No. of No. of
Type of Impact Location Displacement
HH APs

Village Kundi Sehri 7 40
Loss of land affected
No trees affected in Village Kundi
Village Kundi Sehri - -
Loss of trees Sehri
Total 7 40
Table-10.21
Detail of Affected Land
Identification Detail of Affected Land

Sr. No
Name of Agricultural Residential Forest Waste
Project Site Name of Respondent S/O
Settlement Land Land Land Land
1 Jabori Weir Sacha Khurd M. Tariq M. Ashraf 4 0 0 5
2 Jabori Weir Sacha Khurd M.Sultan Gohar Aman 5 0 0 5
3 Jabori Weir Sacha Khurd M. Riaz Abdul Qayyum 4 0 0 6
4 Jabori Weir Sacha Khurd M. Saleem Meer Afzal Khan 3 0 0 5
5 Jabori Weir Sacha Khurd M. Nazir M. Roshan Khan 2 0 0 4
6 Jabori Weir Deedal M. Sultan Khan M. Aslam Khan 3 0 0 5
7 Jabori Weir Deedal Zulfiqar Ali Khan M. Sultan Khan 5 0 0 4
8 Jabori Weir Deedal Ayaz Khan M. Sultan Khan 3 0 0 5
9 Jabori Weir Deedal Niaz Ahmad M. Sultan Khan 3 0 0 4
10 Jabori Weir Deedal Fayyaz Ahmad M. Sultan Khan 4 0 0 5
11 Jabori Weir Deedal Abdul Shakoor M. Sultan Khan 2 0 0 4
12 Jabori Weir Deedal M. Anwer M. Ajoon Khan 3 0 0 5
13 Jabori Weir Deedal M. Asif M. Ajoon Khan 3 0 0 5
14 Jabori Weir Deedal H. Abdur Rasheed M. Ajoon Khan 2 0 0 4
15 Jabori Weir Deedal Arif Abdul Sttar Khan 3 0 0 5
16 Jabori Weir Deedal Abdul Hameed Abdul Hameed 3 0 0 5
17 Jabori Weir Deedal Ghazanfar Ali Abdul Latif 7 0 0 7
18 Jabori Weir Deedal M. Naeem Abdul Latif 5 0 0 6
19 Jabori Weir Deedal Touseef Abdul Latif 5 0 0 6
20 Jabori Weir Upper bela Manzoor Arsla Khan 4 0 3 7
21 Jabori Weir Upper bela Foedad Maroof 2 0 0 4
22 Jabori Weir Upper bela Aurang Zaib Youniz Khan 2 0 0 4
23 Jabori Weir Lower bela M. Zaman Khen-e-Zaman 6 0 0 5
24 Jabori Weir Upper bela Shouket Ali Khushkhal Khan 4 0 0 6
25 Jabori Weir Lower bela Ajmal M. Aslam Khan 6 0 2 6
26 Jabori Weir Lower bela Iqbal Musa Khan 8 0 0 5
27 Jabori Weir Lower bela Jahnzaib Roshan Khan 8 0 0 6
28 Jabori Weir Lower bela Muzamil Ayub M. Ayub Khan 8 0 0 6
29 Jabori Weir Lower bela S. Qasir Firdoon M. Irfan 4 0 0 7
Identification Detail of Affected Land
Sr. No
Name of Agricultural Residential Forest Waste
Project Site Name of Respondent S/O
Settlement Land Land Land Land
30 Jabori Weir Lower bela Daud Arsla Khan 5 0 0 6
31 Jabori Weir Lower bela Rafaqat Ali Khushal Khan 6 0 0 7
32 Jabori Weir Lower bela Abdul Qayyum Hajat Khan 5 0 0 8
33 Jabori Weir Lower bela M.Yousaf Alam Din 1.5 0.5 0 0
34 Power house Granthali M.Farooq Khan Behram Khan 5 0 20 0
35 Power house Granthali M.Ayza Kushal Khan 5 0 0 0
36 Power house Granthali Ahamad nawaz Yaqoob Khan 5 0 5 0
Power house
37 Kundisheri M.Gulnawaz Khan Gulam Farooq 0 0
/access road 6 0
38 Power house Granthali Taj Muhammad Khushal Khan 10 0 0 0
39 Power house Granthali Nazia Jaha Baharam Khan 0 0 2 0
40 Power house Granthali Abdul khanan Kaldar Khan 5 0 0 0
41 Power house Granthali Adil Hussain Gulam Mustafa 5 0 0 0
42 Power house Granthali M.Nasir Haji Anwer 5 0 0 0
43 Power house Granthali Ali Afsar Khushal Khan 5 0 5 0
44 Power house Granthali Khalil-ur-Rahman M.Khan 4 0 8 0
45 Power house Granthali Aurang Zaib Haji Allah Data 5 0 10 0
46 Residence PH Kundisheri Najum Nisa Musa Khan 5 0 0 0
47 Residence PH Kundisheri Sabir Khan Ilyass Khan 5 0 0 0
48 Residence PH Kundisheri kalid Khan Miandad Khan 5 0 0 0
49 Residence PH Kundisheri Rasham jaha Irfan Khan 4 0 0 0
50 Residence PH Kundisheri Bashir Khan M.Ashraf Khan 5 0 0 0
51 Residence PH Kundisheri Mustaq Khan Naseem Khan 4 0 0 0
52 Residence PH Kundisheri Sadaqat Khan Roshan Khan 5 0 0 0
Total 231.5 0.5 55 172
Table-10.22
Details of Affected Trees
Identification Detail of
Sr. No Affected
Project Site Name of Settlement Name of Respondent
Trees
1 Jabori Weir Sacha Khurd Sultan Muhamamd 3
2 Jabori Weir Sacha Khurd M. Riaz 9
3 Jabori Weir Sacha Khurd M. Saleem 10
4 Jabori Weir Sacha Khurd M. Nazir 2
5 Jabori Weir Deedal M. Sultan Khan 11
6 Jabori Weir Deedal Zulfiqar Ali Khan 3
7 Jabori Weir Deedal Niaz Ahmad 2
8 Jabori Weir Deedal Fayyaz Ahmad 4
9 Jabori Weir Deedal Abdul Shakoor 2
10 Jabori Weir Deedal M. Anwer 4
11 Jabori Weir Deedal M. Asif 2
12 Jabori Weir Deedal H. Abdur Rasheed 2
13 Jabori Weir Deedal Arif 8
14 Jabori Weir Deedal Abdul Hameed 10
15 Jabori Weir Deedal Ghazanfar Ali 3
16 Jabori Weir Deedal M. Naeem 2
17 Jabori Weir Deedal Touseef 3
18 Jabori Weir Upper bela Manzoor 2
19 Jabori Weir Upper bela Foedad 3
20 Jabori Weir Upper bela Aurang Zaib 5
21 Jabori Weir Lower bela M. Zaman 1
22 Jabori Weir Upper bela Shouket Ali 1
23 Jabori Weir Lower bela Ajmal 5
24 Jabori Weir Lower bela Iqbal 7
25 Jabori Weir Lower bela Jahnzaib 3
26 Jabori Weir Lower bela Muzamil Ayub 2
27 Jabori Weir Lower bela Daud 5
28 Jabori Weir Lower bela Rafaqat Ali 6
29 Jabori Weir Lower bela Abdul Qayyum 8
30 Jabori Weir Lower bela M.Yousaf 4
31 Power house Granthali M.Farooq Khan 20
32 Power house Granthali M.Ayza 21
33 Power house Granthali Ahamad nawaz 35
34 Power house Granthali Taj Muhammad 7
35 Power house Granthali Nazia Jaha 13
36 Power house Granthali Abdul khanan 19
37 Power house Granthali Adil Hussain 5
38 Power house Granthali M.Nasir 12
39 Power house Granthali Ali Afsar 25
40 Power house Granthali Khalil-ur-Rahman 37
41 Power house Granthali Aurang Zaib 20
42 Residence PH Granthali Rasham jaha 4
Total 350
Table-10.23
Main Differences between LAA and ADB Involuntary Resettlement Guidelines
Pakistans Land Acquisition Act 1894 ADB Involuntary Resettlement Guidelines

Compensation only for landowners with titles Compensation for titleholders and non-
and/ or customary rights titleholders of land alike
Compensation for crop damage to Compensation for crop damage to all
registered landowners and leaseholders sharecroppers and tenants whether they are
registered or not.
Compensation assessed on the basis of Compensation assessed on the basis of
registered land mutation papers replacement value of the affected assets
Land Acquisition Collector is the pre-litigation Disputes, complaints and other grievances are
final authority to decide disputes and address resolved through community participation in the
complaints regarding quantification and form of a Grievance Redress Committee and
assessment of compensation for the affected community based organizations.
assets
The decisions regarding land acquisition and All information related to the quantification of
compensations are to be published in the land acquisition and other affected assets,
official Gazette and notified in convenient entitlements, amounts of compensation and
places so that the people affected become financial assistance must be disclosed to the
aware of the same affected persons/ communities prior to taking
possession of the land.
Table-10.24
Resettlement Entitlement Matrix
Definition of
Type of Loss
APs Entitlement Entitled
(i) Titled owners,
Provision of equivalent land within the
and Cash compensation based on
1.Loss of land by same village
(ii) APs with current market value (plus 15%
owners If land is unavailable compensation at
traditional land Compulsory Acquisition Surcharge)
market/ replacement value.
rights.
(i) Titled owners,
2.Temporary loss Notice to harvest standing crops
and Cash compensation at market
of land by Restoration
(ii) APs with value for the equivalent of two
individual Cash Compensation for loss of
traditional land seasons (4 months of crop income)
landowner/s income potential
rights.
Compensation for sown or standing
crops at market value as for mature
crops
3. Loss of trees Owners &
Fruit bearing trees will be
and standing beneficiaries of Notice to harvest standing crop
compensated at current market
crops. land.
value after fruit for 10 years
Compensation at market value
determined by the Forest
Department,
(i) Titled owners, Cash compensation based on
and Provision of equivalent land within the current market value (plus 15%
4.Relocation of
(ii) APs with same village Compulsory Acquisition Surcharge)
house
traditional land Shifting allowance for assistance in
rights. relocation
5.Drinking water Community Relocation, protection and Water supply pipe will be relocated
pipe Structure Improvement and improved.
6.Any
unanticipated Any unanticipated consequence of the project will be documented and mitigated.
impact
Table-10.25
General Time Frame for Land Acquisition
Step LA Process Agency Responsible Timeline
1 LA Proposal to Revenue Department; with EA (SHYDO) Week 1-2
brief description of the Project scope of
land acquisition, location.
2 Publication of Notice expressing the intend Revenue Department Week 3-4
to acquire the land under Section 4 of LAA (Respective District
LAC)
3 Field survey, inventory of assets affected Revenue Department Week 5-20
4 Declaration under Section 6 notification Revenue Department Week 21-22
5 Dispute/Objections (Grievance Redressal) Aggrieved parties Week 25-26
6 Compensation assessment & award Revenue Department Week 23-24
Preparation
7 Possession of land, marking, clearance Revenue Department Week 23-52
8 Disbursement of compensation cheques Revenue Department Week 23-52
Land acquisition to be completed in a total of 52 weeks (One Year)
Table-10.26
Environmental and Resettlement Cost
Average Estimated
Item
Item Category Unit Quantity rate Amount
No.
(Rs.)/unit (Rs.)
A. Estimated Cost of Resettlement
Permanent Cultivated Land Kanal 207 200,000 41,400,000
1 Land Waste Land Kanal 172 80,000 13,760,000
Acquisition* Forest/ Grazing Land Kanal 55 150,000 8,250,000
Temporary
2 Land Cultivated Land Kanal 25 50,000 1,250,000
Acquisition**
3 Structure*** Residential Unit ft2 1,894 491 929,954
4 Relocating Water Supply Pipe ft 500 400 200,000
At Giyar Scha Cost included in the weir - 0
A new bridge will be
5 Bridge constructed in order to
At Granthali Village - 0
access traffic to power
house site.
Sub Total - A 65,789,954
B- Afforestation Cost
Loss of shade trees No. 200 1,000 200,000
Loss of fruit trees No. 150 1,200 180,000
6 Trees
Compensation
No.
plantation 1050 50 52,500
Sub Total - B 432,500
C. Environmental Monitoring Cost
Common ions, TDS, Once every
Surface Water 36 25,000 900,000
7 TSS, etc. month
Common ions, TDS, Once every
Drinking Water 36 20,000 720,000
8 coli form, BOD, etc. month
Once every
Air PM 10, SO 2 ,No x, CO,etc. 12 25,000 300,000
9 season
Once in three
Noise Equivalent Noise level 12 5,000 60,000
10 months
Sub Total - C 1,980,000
GRAND TOTAL (A+B+C) 68,202,454
* Excluding compulsory acquisition surcharge (CAS at 15%)
**Includes rate of crop value produced on land for one year (for 3 year 1,250,000 x 3)
***Includes land rate
FIGURES
CHAPTER
11
CONSTRUCTION PLANNING AND

COST ESTIMATE
CHAPTER 11
CONSTRUCTION PLANNING AND COST ESTIMATE
11.1 CONSTRUCTION PLANNING
11.1.1 General
The construction planning for 6.5 MW Jabori hydropower project is largely dependant on the
following factors:
- Construction of weir, power tunnel and powerhouse, which are on the critical path
- Long length of the power tunnel
- High and low flow periods in the Siran river
- Excavation in hard strata of powerhouse and power tunnel
- Transmission line of 20 km length
- Manpower, equipment and other resources available with the contractor
There are five main components of the project:
- Weir and vicinity works

- Power tunnel
- Surge Chamber and penstock
- Powerhouse
- Transmission line
The work on all these components can be carried out independently and the schedule has
been prepared in such a way that the work can be taken up simultaneously on various sites
in order to complete the project in the shortest possible time.
It is anticipated that the construction of the project will be completed in 32 months period.
The sequence, in which the construction of various components of the project will be taken
up, has been shown in Figure-11.1 and described in the following paragraphs.
The construction work of cofferdam starts from mid-October i.e. start of low flow period, as
indicated in the construction schedule. For civil works, about 19 months will be needed and
erection of electromechanical works will start from the 21th month of construction period. As
such the first unit will be available for testing and commissioning by 26th month of
construction schedule.
11.1.2 Land Acquisition
No major problem is envisaged in acquisition of land. It is anticipated that land required for
the project will be acquired / purchased in 6 months. To streamline the project
implementation and to avoid delays, it is desirable that the land acquisition process is
11 - 1
accomplished and possession of land is taken at least one month before award of
construction work. In this respect, priority will be given to acquisition of land for construction
of access road. It is envisaged that the land required for the establishment of camps, stores
and workshops will be acquired on temporary basis by direct negotiation and through an
agreement with the owners. Principally, this is the responsibility of the contractor and the
cost is to be reflected in the bids.
11.1.3 Mobilization and Preparatory Works
It is envisaged that the contractor will mobilize to the site within 15 days period after signing
the contract agreement. Having procured the land for the camping and other facilities within
the first two months, the contractor will start establishing facilities. A period of about 7
months has been allocated for this assignment. The main activities in this period, to be
undertaken by the contractor, are briefly outlined below:
- The construction of access road, to weir site and powerhouse location. Temporary
access to power tunnel will be made by the contractor according to this work
program. A period of 3 months has been provided for the contractor to complete this
activity.
- Simultaneously the contractor is required to construct residential and storage

facilities for his manpower, equipment, material and erect concrete batching plant.
- As the contractor will need power supply to run his equipment and to provide
electricity for his camp, he has to arrange proper power supply facility within one
month.
- In addition, the EPC contractor will put effort on investigation, detail designing of the
project components and demarcating the layout of the project.
11.1.4 Exploration for Borrow Areas and Construction Materials
In the light of feasibility/design studies, the contractor has to explore and test materials to
check their suitability for use in construction. It is envisaged that this activity will be
completed during the mobilization period.
11.1.5 Coffer Dams and Care of Water
The project envisages two stage diversion of the river flow. The first stage cofferdam is
assumed to be constructed during the low flow period starting from mid-October and will be
completed in 2 months period. This will facilitate construction of intake structures and right
part of the weir which are expected to be completed within about 7 months. Then
construction of second stage cofferdam and removal of first stage cofferdam will
simultaneously be started to facilitate the construction of remaining part of the weir. As
indicated in the construction schedule, the construction of civil works at the weir and intake
sections will take about 22 months during which the contractor will be vigilant for care of
water including dewatering.
11 - 2
11.1.6 Weir and Intake Structure Works
Construction of a weir which includes intake for power tunnel is on the critical path. As the
work has to be carried out across the river, it is thus proposed that this work should be
taken up in two stages as described below:
This activity has been planned to start in 2nd month when flows in the river are low. It is
proposed that a coffer dam should be constructed in the river to isolate the right side as
shown in Figure-6.20 and Figure-6.21 of Chapter 6, leaving the main channel uninterrupted.
The excavation of rock, preparation of foundation of weir and stilling basin, concreting the
weir walls, left wing wall and the part of the stilling basin floor will be completed. A 6 ft. dia
pipe will be left in the weir to allow low level discharge to pass through during second stage
construction. By the end of 23rd month the structure will be ready to control/ regulate the
river flow.
11.1.7 Sand Trap
As per Consultants planning, it is proposed to initiate work on sand trap along with the
stage 1 construction of the weir structure. The sand trap is located downstream of the weir.
While the construction of weir is underway, simultaneously the work on this structure will be
taken up. The excavation for sand trap will be completed in two months while the structures
will be constructed in another 11 months period. Installation of lift gates and fixing of trash
racks will take another 5 months.
11.1.8 Power Tunnel
There is exposed rock at the start and end of the power tunnel and the construction and
excavation activities can be taken up simultaneously. As the tunnel is about 1060 m long, it
is proposed that separate/ independent crews shall be deployed for this part of work. A
period of about 12 months is foreseen for completion of power tunnel. It is proposed that
this activity should be started by the contractor immediately after mobilization and the tunnel
should be ready by the time other components are completed so that water can be made
available for testing and commissioning.
11.1.9 Surge Shaft
For Surge shaft, which is again one of major structures of the project, a period of 11 months
has been provided. As this work is also on the critical path, therefore, it is proposed to be
taken up when the first stage construction of weir is undertaken. The foundation and
concreting for the surge chamber will take about 3 months. The installation of trash rack and
gates of penstock pipe will be taken up as soon as the concrete work is completed. The
surge chamber will be ready by the end of 21st month.
11.1.10 Penstock
It is a main critical activity. As the penstock is about 511 m long, it is proposed that
separate/ independent crew shall be deployed for this part of work. The activity on aligning,
fabrication and erection of the penstock will take about 10 months. The fabrication of the
penstock and construction of anchor blocks would simultaneously be started early to
11 - 3
accomplish the work well in time to allow about 6 months for erection of the penstock and
completion of work by the end of 25th month.
11.1.11 Powerhouse
Civil works for powerhouse are also on the critical path. Installation work of
electromechanical equipment, embedded parts of the turbines and generators and the
construction of the superstructure is involved in this activity. Construction of the powerhouse
has been planned in such a manner that it should be ready by the time other structures are
completed. The powerhouse is to be constructed on the right bank of the river. Excavation
will be taken up during the dry period in order to avoid flooding. This activity will start
immediately. The completion of excavation including treatment for foundations is proposed
to take about 2.5 months. Concreting will be started in 8th month of construction period and
construction of the powerhouse is expected to be completed by the end of 25th month.
Fabrication of steel and aluminium doors and windows and architectural work will also be
completed by this time. The total period to complete the civil works of the powerhouse has
been taken as 19 months.
11.1.12 Tailrace
Excavation of tailrace will commence with the powerhouse excavation. The excavated
material will be utilized to make access paths in and around the powerhouse and tailrace
area. Completion of tailrace shall coincide with powerhouse completion.
11.1.13 Installation of E&M Equipment
Full manufacturing of the equipment is expected to take 12 months, however the deliveries
will start to materialize at site by 10th month as shown in construction schedule. The
manufacturing of E&M equipment particularly the turbines and generators are again on the
critical path and as such the work for these has to be awarded at the time of award of civil
works. It is also normal for the equipment to be delivered in stages starting with the
embedded parts. Placement of embedded parts will start with second stage concrete.
Installations of these items are expected to start by end of 15th month. The installation of
units has been proposed to be carried out in stages. As soon as curing of concrete around
embedded parts is complete the generator and turbine for the first unit will be installed.
The deck for the switchyard would be substantially completed by 17th month and erection of
switchyard equipment, transformers, gantries, isolators and switchgear will be initiated. Bus
bars will be strung and droppers connected up. Powerhouse and switchyard lighting will
also be taken up during this period. Installation of panels connection will start at the
beginning of 18th month and will be completed by the end of 19th month. Total construction
time for this activity will be 4 months.
11.1.14 Transmission Line
Work on 20 km long 132 kV double circuit transmission line will start by 20th month and
shall be completed by 27th month. Total construction time for this activity will be 7 months.
11 - 4
11.1.15 Testing and Commissioning
The work on commissioning of the units will be taken up in stages starting from 24th month
and will include the dehydration of the transformers and testing of switchgear. All relays will
be calibrated by secondary injection tests. Primary current injection tests will be applied to
all CTs and their ratios verified. Relay wiring will be checked and breakers tripped by
manual operation of each relay. The turbines will be given no-load mechanical runs to
ensure vibration free operation and to check temperature rise of all bearings. Generators
will be dried out using standard procedure. After dry out, voltage will be built up, phase
sequence checked and if correct, each machine synchronized with the system.
Load runs will be executed to ascertain smooth operation and normal temperature rise of all
bearings and windings. If possible, response of each unit to stepped changes of load and
voltage will be checked. Full load rejection will be compared with predicted values. If all the
above tests and observations give satisfactory results the station would be certified as fully
commissioned. This activity is expected to be completed in three months period.
11.2 COST ESTIMATE
11.2.1 General
This section describes the assumptions and results relating to the capital cost estimate of
the Jabori hydropower project. The total project construction cost of civil works has been
estimated on the basis of rates of various items of work as provided on the web site of
Government of KP for 2nd quarter of year 2009 for Mansehra District. Difficulty factor has
also been included therein. In the case of cost of E&M equipment, due considerations have
been given to recession in the market and low prices being quoted by Chinese
manufacturers. Equipment which can be manufactured in Pakistan has also been priced
accordingly.
11.2.2 Recapitulation of the Project Base Cost
The estimated project base cost is summarized as follows:
Local Foreign Total

Sr.
Description Pak. Rs. Pak. Rs. Pak. Rs.
No.
(Million) (Million) (Million)
1 Direct Cost
Civil Works 534.75 - 534.75
Permanent Equipment
Electro-Mechanical Works 67.68 45.31 112.99
Hydro-Mechanical Works - 225.80 225.80
Transmission Line 60.00 - 60.00
2 Indirect Cost
Preliminary Works 92.70 - 92.70
Environment & Resettlement Costs 68.20 - 68.20
Detailed Design and Tender Documents 16.47 5.42 21.89
Client Expenses, Administration and Legal Costs 24.70 8.13 32.83
3 Engineering and Supervision Costs 32.93 10.84 43.77
4 Physical Contingencies @ 5% 41.17 13.56 54.73
5 Base Cost of Project 938.60 309.06 1,247.66
11 - 5
6 Duties & Taxes Costs 13.56 - 13.56
11.2.3 Price Level and Rate of Exchange
The estimate is based on June 2010 price level and is consolidated in US dollars. The
exchange rate of US$ 1.00 = Rs.85.00 has been adopted.
11.2.4 Scope of the Cost Estimates
The cost of all works required to complete the project, fit for its purpose, has been included
in the estimate. However, the following expenditures have been excluded from the Project
Base Cost, although duly covered in the Capital Cost:
- Expenditure incurred before the issuance of notice for the Contractor to proceed.
- Escalation of price and currency fluctuations after June 2010.
- Duties and taxes on imported equipment and installed plant.
- Interest during construction (IDC) and other financing charges.
11.2.5 Project Base Cost Components
The project base cost estimate includes both the direct and the indirect costs associated
with the project.
11.2.5.1 Project Direct Costs
The project direct costs are those directly associated with the main project features and
include the cost of all structures, power generation and transmission facilities. The project
direct costs are subdivided into the following main headings:
- Civil Works
- Permanent Equipment
- Electro-mechanical Works
- Hydro-mechanical Works
- Switchyards and Transmission Line
11.2.5.2 Project Indirect Costs
The project indirect costs include all other expenditures required to complete the project and
include those costs that cannot readily be allocated to any specific project feature including:
- Temporary camps and other facilities.
11 - 6
- Roads, bridges and other access facilities.
- Environmental and resettlement
- Engineering and project management.
- Owners administration expenses.
11.2.6 Currency Breakdown
The costs are divided into their local and foreign currency components. This breakdown
was based on the source origin of the labor, materials, equipment or the services involved.
11.2.7 Basic Assumptions and Limitations
The cost estimate was based on the following assumptions:
- Construction of the project, fit for its purpose, will be completed in 32 months.
- The economic conditions, both in Pakistan and worldwide, will remain essentially
stable.
- The project layout and work quantities as defined in the Feasibility Report will not be
significantly changed during the final design stage (minor variations are covered by
contingency allowance).
- Specifications and general contract conditions will be in accordance with

international standards and will not be unduly restrictive. These will include an
equitable distribution of risks, payment of mobilization fees, contract price
adjustment formulae and adequate provisions to maintain positive cash flows by the
contractor.
- The project will be bid under international competitive tendering conditions, and an
adequate number of firms will be invited to tender to ensure a fair degree of
competition.
- Work permits visas will be issued for all expatriate supervisory personnel required
for execution of specialized civil and electromechanical works.
- All necessary permits for the right-of-way and use of access to the site will be
guaranteed and secured by the owner.
- Resettlement and other preliminary activities will be completed by the owner without
affecting the scheduled key milestone dates.
- The main access road will be up-graded by the Contractor without causing delays to
the scheduled key milestone dates.
The capital cost for developing 6.5 MW Jabori hydropower project is formulated under three
distinct heads.
11 - 7
- The civil works which cover preliminary works, intake system, sediment removal,
water conveyance system, powerhouse and switchyard, offices, residential colony,
communications and other items of civil works.
- Supply, transportation, erection and commissioning of electromechanical equipment
- Development cost, corporate overheads, project management, construction

insurance and interest during construction, land, environmental costs and other
financing charges.
Work conditions in the area are expected to be fairly good. The country has a fair stock of
machinery operators. Conventional method of excavation is intended to be used for all
components. Good quality construction material is available in the vicinity and/or in the
adjoining areas of Jabori. These conditions were kept in mind while working out the
estimate. It is assumed that a main contractor would execute the job. He may sublet the
works to local contractors involving simple jobs like colony building, supply of materials and
other jobs not requiring heavy machinery and specialized knowledge.
11.2.8 Development of Cost Estimate for Civil Work
11.2.8.1 Civil Work Quantities
Quantities of civil work items for Jabori hydropower project have been calculated from the
feasibility-level design drawings. Where possible the quantities have been worked out using
AutoCAD techniques; otherwise the quantities have been derived through manual
computations.
Quantities for civil work have been computed on the basis of Layout Plan developed for the
scheme and actual topography of the area. The quantities of excavation are obtained from
the cross sections drawn at suitable intervals. Quantities for structures have been
calculated from the plans and sections of various component structures. The quantities of
electrical and mechanical equipment have been computed on the basis of selected size and
type of generating units and design outlines.
11.2.8.2 Selection of Construction Methods
The cost estimate was developed based upon the utilization of conventional and proven
construction methods that can be realistically applied in Pakistan for the execution of the
project.
11.2.8.3 Open Cut Excavation
The cost estimate assumes that all open cut excavation will be executed by use of medium
(5 to 8 m3 capacity) to large (9 to 12 m3 capacity) excavators, loaders and matching off-
highway dump trucks. Drilling and blasting operations were assumed to be performed using
medium size hydraulic track drills and conventional explosives. Production rates for open
cut excavation are based on past experience on similar projects.
11 - 8
11.2.8.4 Underground Excavation
Excavation for the tunnel was assumed to be performed using conventional drilling and
blasting techniques and equipment. Tunneling rates used were those experienced on
similar work. The construction program allows sufficient time for crossing foreseeable faults
and difficult geology.
11.2.8.5 Processing of Construction Materials
The cost estimate was based on the assumption that all processed materials for both
coarse and fine concrete aggregates and filters would be obtained from required
excavations and also from a quarry. For estimating purposes, it was assumed that a
crushing and screening plant of at least 20 ton per hour capacity would be installed at site to
provide aggregates for the conventional concrete.
11.2.8.6 Conventional Concrete
The cost estimate was based on the assumption that the conventional concrete would be
manufactured using a 20 m3 per hour capacity batch and mix plant having aggregate pre-
cooling and ice manufacturing facilities.
11.2.8.7 Material and Supplies
It was assumed that most of the required materials will be available from sources within
Pakistan. The only significant items that will have to be imported are bits, rods and other
drilling consumables. Rates of these items therefore include custom duties and taxes. The
cost of these materials and supplies also covers delivery to the site. These materials include
local as well as foreign currency purchase. The supply of cement, reinforcing steel,
structural steel etc is included in the local currency purchase whereas mechanical rebar
joints etc are included as a foreign currency purchase. Cost of small tools and supplies such
as safety clothing, hand tools, small power tools, hardware, ladders and welding plant was
taken as (up to 10%) of each sub item cost.
11.2.8.8 Construction Program
A base construction schedule was developed on critical path planning as shown on Figure-
11.1. This schedule comprises the total project split into its main components. Schedule
activity sequence and durations were based on production rates that can be reasonably
achieved by use of the plant and equipment that was selected for the purposes of
developing the cost estimate. The schedule shows that the project could be completed in 32
months.
11.2.8.9 Analysis of Unit Rates
Rates for different items of Civil Work for Jabori Hydropower Project have been based on:
- The rates of various items of civil works have been taken from the Government of
the KP, web site namely http://www.nwfpfinance.gov.pk/csr2009.pdf
11 - 9
- The rate of each item of work has been down loaded from website mentioned above
and a difficulty factor of 1.08% for Manshera district has been added for difficult
terrain of the Project area. Due escalation was also applied to all unit rates.
- Rates of E&M works such as turbines, generators, transformers and other related
equipment have been adopted in view of the following considerations:
a) Rates from on-going similar projects.
b) Using engineering judgment to review the prevailing local market rates of

different items.
c) Current recession in market and low rates being quoted by Chinese

manufacturers.
11.2.8.10 Historical Costs
Unit costs for minor civil work items were derived from properly adjusted historical records.
For comparison purposes, historical in-house data from previous projects, formulae and
experience curves were also used to check estimated costs for the major civil works. Where
necessary, adjustments for escalation (to June 2010 price levels) and for local conditions
were applied.
11.2.8.11 Lump Sum Costs
Minor cost items have been shown as lump sums. In most cases, these items have been
calculated analytically or obtained from historical data.
11.2.8.12 Miscellaneous Items Cost
The estimate includes an allowance for unquantifiable and unforeseen miscellaneous items,
such as excavation over break, waterstops, lean concrete, bedding mortar, grouting, nuts,
instrumentation to observe rock movements, anchor bolts, steel ribs, special finishes,
miscellaneous steel work, minor equipment/tools, contact grouting, small quantity variations,
etc.
All such unquantifiable / unforeseen miscellaneous items have been labelled and accounted
globally as Other Items. Depending on the type of work, the allowances for these items
vary from 0 to 10 percent of the corresponding section subtotal.
11.2.9 Development of Cost Estimate for Permanent Equipment
11.2.9.1 Turbines, Generators and Transformers
The cost for the supply and installation of turbines, generators and transformers was
determined from international manufacturers budgetary prices. These prices were
compared with in-house historical data and experience curves and were found reasonable.
11 - 10
11.2.9.2 Hydro-mechanical Equipment
Costs of gates, hoists, trash racks, and other miscellaneous hydro-mechanical equipments
were estimated on the basis of component weight or adjusted data from previous projects.
11.2.9.3 Permanent Miscellaneous Electromechanical Equipment
The cost of the balance of plant and the miscellaneous electromechanical equipment was
estimated in detail on the basis of preliminary specifications and in-house historical data
that was available from similar projects.
11.2.9.4 132 kV Transmission Line and Substations
Transmission line from bus bar will be connected to Battal grid station. The length of
transmission line is estimated as 20 km. The cost of 132 kV transmission line and the
substation costs were estimated on the basis of contract prices of existing WAPDA projects
and prices obtained from the manufacturers. The construction costs have been estimated
considering the difficult terrain and access involved. Cost of towers and foundations were
estimated based on conductor loadings.
11.2.9.5 Transport and Communication Equipment
Provision has also been made for vehicles and communication equipment.
11.2.9.6 Erection and Transportation Charges
Erection and transportation charges associated with the electrical and mechanical
equipment are taken as @ 5% of the total cost of E & M works.
11.2.10 Development of Cost Estimate for the Project Indirect Cost
11.2.10.1 Temporary Camps and Other Facilities
It is assessed that staff needed for operation and maintenance will stay at site and will need
accommodation. A 7,500 m2 covered area is proposed for residential and office quarters.
Temporary camps and offices required for the project were priced based upon information
on local housing costs obtained in Bisham, Mansehra, Jabori and similar other parts of the
country. The prices were adjusted for the type and quality of buildings required for the
project.
It was assumed that at the end of the construction period some of the temporary camps will
be converted to permanent colonies to serve the operation and maintenance staff. An
allowance for renovation of these facilities was included in the estimate.
11.2.10.2 Roads, Bridges and Other Related Project Access Facilities
It is assumed that 20 km of existing road will be upgraded for approach to weir (work has
already started in this respect). For approach to powerhouse, a new RC bridge on Siran
River is proposed. Costs have been estimated based on a feasibility level design of the
relocated road and the proposed bridge.
11 - 11
11.2.10.3 Environmental and Resettlement Aspects
The cost for mitigation of the environmental impact and resettlement was estimated as
follows:
- The cost for land compensation was estimated based on current market rates.
- The cost of trees was estimated on the assumed value of the crop of mulberry tree
for 20 years and the cost of firewood.
- The cost of other public assets was obtained from local government authorities. The
cost of public assets like township roads, village roads and water supply was
estimated using unit prices.
- The cost for electric power supply lines and telephone lines was estimated based on
current prices.
11.2.11 Detail Design and Tender Documents
Cost for detailed design and tender documents has been charged to the Jabori hydropower
project @ 2% of the sum of civil, electrical, mechanical, transmission and preliminary work
costs.
11.2.12 Client Expenses
Client expenses i.e. cost for administration and legal matters has been charged to the
Jabori Hydropower project @ 3% of the sum of civil, electrical, mechanical, transmission
and preliminary work costs.
11.2.13 Engineering and Project Management Cost
An allowance of @ 4% of the total estimated construction cost (sum of civil, electrical,

mechanical, transmission and preliminary work costs) was included to cover the following
engineering and administration expenses:
- Prequalification of contractors
- Evaluation of tenders
- Review of contractors submittals
- Construction management including construction supervision, contract

administration and processing of contractors claims.
- Other costs incurred by the Owner and the Engineer
11.2.14 Duties and Taxes
Costs relating to duties and taxes on imported construction equipment and installed plant
were included in the project base cost. Five percent of the cost of foreign components has
been estimated as custom duty.
11 - 12
11.2.15 Physical Contingency, IDC and Price Escalation
A contingency allowance @ 5% of the project base cost was included in the estimate. This
allowance was considered appropriate to cover the cost of uncertainties and unforeseeable
conditions. Price escalations and amount for Interest During Construction (IDC) are also
added separately for project capital cost.
11.2.16 Cash Flow
The capital cost estimate for the project base cost was based on the construction program.
It is anticipated that all power generating units will be in commercial operation in 32 months.
The resulting cash flow was also prepared keeping in view the construction of the entire
project.
11.2.17 Cost Estimate
Summary of cost estimate is placed as Table-11.1, while detailed cost estimate of the
project is tabulated in Table-11.2.
11 - 13
TABLES
Feasibility Study
Sheet 1 of 1
Table 11.1
JABORI HYDRO-POWER PROJECT
SUMMARY OF COST ESTIMATE
Amount
Code Description Remarks
(Million Pak. Rs.)
100 Preliminary Works 92.70

200 Environment & Resettlement Costs 68.20
300 Civil Works 534.75

400 Diversion 3.39
500 Main Dam/Weir 133.82
600 Bottom Outlets 8.50
700 Power Conduits 10.83
800 Power Tunnel including Penstock 249.89
900 Sand Trap 12.57
1000 Surge Chamber 21.62
1100 Power House 92.67
1200 Tailrace Channel 1.46
1300 Electrical and Mechanical Works 398.79

1400 Hydraulic Steel Structures 4.00
1500 Hydro-Mechanical Equipment 225.80
1600 Powerhouse Mechanical Equipment 54.00
1700 Powerhouse Electrical Equipment 34.00
1800 Transmission Line including Inter Connection 62.00
1804 Transportation and Erection Charges 18.99
1900 Sub Total -1 1,094.44
2000 Detail Design and Tender Documents @ 2% 21.89
2100 Client Expenses, Administration and Legal Costs @ 3% 32.83
2200 Engineering and Supervision Costs @ 4% 43.78
2300 Physical Contingencies @ 5% 54.72
2400 TOTAL BASE COST ( Million Pak. Rs. ) 1,247.66
2500 Duties & Taxes @ 5% 13.56

Sheet 1 of 8
TABLE - 11.2
COST ESTIMATE
Local Foreign
Rate Total Amount
Code Description Unit Qty Amount Amount
(Pak. Rs.) (Pak. Rs.)
100 Preliminary Works

110 Construction of Camps and Colony
111 Construction cost for camps and colony m2 7,500 9,000 67,500,000 67,500,000 -
112 Access roads km 2 3,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 -
113 New Concrete DR Bridge at Powerhouse Site m2 320 60,000 19,200,000 19,200,000 -
Total - A 92,700,000 92,700,000 -

200 Environment & Resettlement Costs
201 Cost for Land Acquisition L.S. 1 64,660,000 64,660,000 64,660,000 -
202 Cost for Structures L.S. 1 929,954 929,954 929,954 -
203 Cost for Trees L.S. 1 432,500 432,500 432,500 -
204 Cost for relocation of water supply Pipe L.S. 1 200,000 200,000 200,000 -
205 Environment Monitoring Cost L.S. 1 1,980,000 1,980,000 1,980,000 -
(* for details refer chapter-10, table 10.20) Total - B 68,202,454 68,202,454 -
300 Civil Works

400 Diversion
401 Earth Work Including Compaction m3 2,000 94.61 189,220 189,220 -
402 Stone Pitching m3 900 1,087.31 978,579 978,579 -
403 Brick walls m2 500 4,450.92 2,225,460 2,225,460 -
Section Total 3,393,259 3,393,259 -

Other items or Misc. items @ 0% - - -
Sub Total - 1 3,393,259 3,393,259 -
Sheet 2 of 8
TABLE - 11.2
COST ESTIMATE
Local Foreign
Rate Total Amount
500 Main Dam/Weir

501 Common Excavation m3 155 189.22 29,329 29,329 -
502 Rock Excavation m3 1,847 454.12 838,760 838,760 -
503 Concrete in Main Dam m3 11,109 6,053.72 67,250,775 67,250,775 -
504 Reinforcing Steel (Grade - 60) tonne 155 87,672.88 13,589,296 13,589,296 -
505 Cut-off-Walls m3 2,000 6,053.72 12,107,440 12,107,440 -
506 Dewatering L.S. 1 20,000,000 20,000,000 20,000,000 -
507 Instrumentation for Geo Tech. L.S. 1 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 -
508 Extra Care for Right Abt. (Geotech) L.S. 1 10,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 -
Section Total 133,815,600 133,815,600 -

Sub Total - 2 133,815,600 133,815,600 -
600 Bottom Outlets
601 Concrete in Intake m3 63 6,053.72 381,384 381,384 -
602 Concrete in Lining m3 168 8,143.26 1,368,068 1,368,068 -
604 Steel Liner tonne 33 162,165.91 5,351,475 5,351,475 -
Section Total 8,503,693 8,503,693 -

Sub Total - 3 8,503,693 8,503,693 -
700 Cut & Cover Power Conduits

701 Rock Excavation m3 1,685 454.12 765,192 765,192 -
702 Concrete in Intake Portals (both resevoir+sandtrap) m3 759 6,053.72 4,594,773 4,594,773 -
Sheet 3 of 8
TABLE - 11.2
COST ESTIMATE
Local Foreign
Rate Total Amount
703 Concrete in Conduit m3 104 7,034.41 731,579 731,579 -

Section Total 10,825,880 10,825,880 -

Sub Total - 4 10,825,880 10,825,880 -
800 Power Tunnel including Penstock

801 Common Excavation m3 1,808 189.22 342,110 342,110 -
802 Rock Excavation in Power Tunnel m3 7,231 2,680.38 19,381,828 19,381,828 -
803 Concrete in Tunnel Linings m3 4,552 8,143.26 37,068,120 37,068,120 -
804 Concrete in Tunnel Intake Portal m3 315 6,053.72 1,906,922 1,906,922 -
806 Steel Liner for Penstocks tonne 347 162,165.91 56,271,571 56,271,571 -
807 Shotcrete (5 cm Thickness) m2 2,430 7,886.13 19,163,296 19,163,296 -
808 Shotcrete (10 cm Thickness) m2 5,424 11,829.19 64,161,527 64,161,527 -
809 Shotcrete (20 cm Thickness) m2 160 19,715.31 3,154,450 3,154,450 -
810 Rock Bolts 2.5m long, Dia 32mm Nos. 3,774 1,959.89 7,396,625 7,396,625 -
811 Rock Bolts 3m long, Dia 25mm Nos. 78 2,416.41 188,480 188,480 -
Section Total 242,613,642 242,613,642 -

Other items or Misc. items(Steel ribs etc.) @ 3% 7,278,409 7,278,409 -
Sub Total - 5 249,892,051 249,892,051 -
900 Sand Trap

901 Rock Excavation m3 9,823 454.12 4,460,821 4,460,821 -
Sheet 4 of 8
TABLE - 11.2
COST ESTIMATE
Local Foreign
Rate Total Amount
902 Back Fillings including Compaction m3 2,680 94.61 253,555 253,555 -

904 Reinforcing Steel (Grade - 60) m3 38 87,672.88 3,331,569 3,331,569 -
Section Total 12,568,074 12,568,074 -

Sub Total - 6 12,568,074 12,568,074 -
1000 Surge Chamber

1001 Common Excavation m3 1,671 189.22 316,187 316,187 -
1002 Rock Excavation in Power Tunnel m3 6,684 2,680.38 17,915,660 17,915,660 -
1003 Concrete in Tunnel Linings m3 47 8,143.26 382,733 382,733 -
1006 Shotcrete (5 cm Thickness) m2 - 7,886.13 - - -
1009 Rock Bolts 2.5m long, Dia 32mm Nos. - 1,959.89 - - -
1010 Rock Bolts 3m long, Dia 25mm Nos. - 2,416.41 - - -
Section Total 21,618,449 21,618,449 -

Sub Total - 7 21,618,449 21,618,449 -
1100 Power House

1101 Rock Excavation m3 4,110 454.12 1,866,433 1,866,433 -
Sheet 5 of 8
TABLE - 11.2
COST ESTIMATE
Local Foreign
Rate Total Amount
1102 Back Fillings including Compaction m3 1,995 94.61 188,747 188,747 -

1103 Structural Concrete Class - A m3 399 8,143.26 3,249,161 3,249,161 -
1104 Structural Concrete Class - B m3 918 7,034.41 6,457,588 6,457,588 -
1105 Structural Concrete Class - C m3 5,087 6,053.72 30,795,274 30,795,274 -
1106 Lean Concrete Class - D m3 71 3,197.76 227,041 227,041 -
1108 Architectural Works L.S. 1 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 -
Section Total 92,672,759 92,672,759 -

Sub Total - 8 92,672,759 92,672,759 -
1200 Tailrace Channel

1201 Portal Excavation m3 348 454.12 158,034 158,034 -
1202 Concrete in Outlet Portal m3 118 6,053.72 714,339 714,339 -
1203 Lean Concrete Class - D m3 19 3,197.76 60,757 60,757 -
1204 Reinforcing Steel (Grade - 60) tonne 6 87,672.88 526,037 526,037 -
Section Total 1,459,167 1,459,167 -
Sub Total - 9 1,459,167 1,459,167 -
Total Civil Work Cost - C 534,748,932 534,748,932 -
1300 Electrical and Mechanical Works

1400 Hydraulic Steel Works
1401 Trash Rack and Gates Lot. 2 1,400,000 2,800,000 2,800,000 -
Sheet 6 of 8
TABLE - 11.2
COST ESTIMATE
Local Foreign
Rate Total Amount
1402 Trash Rack Cleaner Set 1 800,000 800,000 800,000 -

1403 Stoplog Set for Intake Set 1 400,000 400,000 400,000 -
Sub Total -1 4,000,000 4,000,000 -
1500 Hydro-Mechanical Equipment

1501 Frances (3.24 MW each) Nos 2 30,000,000 60,000,000 - 60,000,000
1502 Generator and Exciter Set 1 70,000,000 70,000,000 - 70,000,000
1503 Governor Set 1 29,000,000 29,000,000 - 29,000,000
1504 PH Crane , Mobile Crane and Draft tube monorail hoist Set 1 35,000,000 35,000,000 - 35,000,000
1505 Butterfly inlet Valves Set 1 31,800,000 31,800,000 - 31,800,000
Sub Total - 2 225,800,000 - 225,800,000

1600 Powerhouse Mechanical Equipment
1601 Cooling System L.S. 1 6,200,000 6,200,000 2,480,000 3,720,000
1602 Fire Fighting System L.S. 1 1,500,000 1,500,000 600,000 900,000
1603 Drainage & Dewatering L.S. 1 9,400,000 9,400,000 3,760,000 5,640,000
1604 High & Low Pressure Air L.S. 1 11,000,000 11,000,000 4,400,000 6,600,000
1605 Ventilation & Air Conditioning L.S. 1 7,600,000 7,600,000 3,040,000 4,560,000
1606 Workshop Equipment L.S. 1 12,300,000 12,300,000 4,920,000 7,380,000
1607 Water Level Measuring Device Nos 1 1,000,000 1,000,000 400,000 600,000
1608 Miscellaneous Mechanical System L.S. 1 5,000,000 5,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000
Sub Total - 3 54,000,000 21,600,000 32,400,000

1700 Powerhouse Electrical Equipment
1701 Main Transformer Nos 1 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 -
Sheet 7 of 8
TABLE - 11.2
COST ESTIMATE
Local Foreign
Rate Total Amount
1702 Auxiliary Transformer Nos 1 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 -

1703 MV/LV Switch Gears L.S. 1 14,000,000 14,000,000 14,000,000 -
1704 D.C Supply L.S. 1 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 -
1705 Earthling System L.S. 1 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 -
1706 Emergency D.G.Set (50 kW) Nos 1 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 -
1707 Measuring & Protection L.S. 1 6,000,000 6,000,000 6,000,000 -
1708 Telecommunication Equipment L.S. 1 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 -
1709 Lighting and Clock L.S. 1 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 -
Sub Total - 4 34,000,000 34,000,000 -

1800 Transmission Line
1801 Transmission Line KM 20 3,000,000 60,000,000 60,000,000 -
1802 Separate bay in existing nearby WAPDA Grid station L.S. 1 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 -
Sub Total -5 62,000,000 62,000,000 -
Sub Total E & M 379,800,000 121,600,000 258,200,000

1804 Transportation and Erection Charges @ 5% 18,990,000 6,080,000 12,910,000
Total E & M Work Cost - D 398,790,000 127,680,000 271,110,000
1900 Total Cost (Total A+B+C+D) 1,094,441,386 823,331,386 271,110,000
2000 Detail Design and Tender Documents @ 2% 21,888,828 16,466,628 5,422,200
2100 Client Expenses, Administration and Legal Costs @ 3% 32,833,242 24,699,942 8,133,300
Sheet 8 of 8
TABLE - 11.2
COST ESTIMATE
Local Foreign
Rate Total Amount
2200 Engineering and Supervision Costs @ 4% 43,777,655 32,933,255 10,844,400
2300 Physical Contingencies @ 5% 54,722,069 41,166,569 13,555,500
2400 TOTAL BASE COST Pak.Rs. 1,247,663,180 938,597,780 309,065,400
TOTAL BASE COST ( 1 US $ = 85 Rs.) US $ 14,678,390 11,042,327 3,636,064
2500 Duties & Taxes @ 5% 13,556,000 13,556,000
Total Base Cost 14.68 Million US $
Total Installed Capacity 6.50 MW
Total Cost per MW 2.26 Million US $
Annual Energy 41.00 GWh

FIGURES
FIG: 11.1
Overall Implimentation Programme Including Construction Schedule
ID Task Name Duration Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1
Pre-Construction Stage 405 days
2 Feasibility Study 0 days 1/1

3 PC - I 15 days
4 Tariff, Power Sales Terms & NEPRA Approval 270 days
5 Other Misc. Legal Issues and Approvals 250 days
6 Power Purchase Agreement 270 days
7 Water Use Agreement 270 days
8 210 days
Land Acquisition
9 Program Set-up 30 days
10 Land Acquisition 180 days
11 180 days
Permits and Approvals
12 Environmental Clearance 180 days
13 Generation License 180 days
14 390 days
Consultancy and Tendering
15 Appointment of Consultant 90 days
16 Additional Investigation and surveys 120 days
17 Tender Design and Tender Documents 150 days
18 Prequalification of EPC Contractor 180 days
19 Tendering and Receiving Bids 60 days
20 Tender Evaluation and Selection of Contractor 60 days
21 Negotiation and Awards 30 days
22
Construction Stage 999 days
23 Financing Institution Reporting Requirement 500 days

24 Environmental Mitigation and Monitoring 500 days
25 Compensations 500 days
26 Staffing and Training for Operation 210 days
27 435 days
Preparatory Works
28 Notice to Proceed + Mobilization 15 days
29 Final Plant Size and Layout 90 days
30 Detail Design of Civil and other Works 330 days
31 Offices, Camps, Colony and Other Site Facilities 180 days
32 Access Road and others 90 days
33 Concrete Plant and Equipment 60 days
34 485 days
River Diversion
35 Construction of Embankment for Stage-I Cofferdam 60 days
36 Construction of Embankment for Stage-II Cofferdam 60 days
37 Care and Handling of Water 210 days
38 Dewatering 210 days
39 Removal of Cofferdam Stage-I 15 days
40 Removal of Cofferdam Stage-II 15 days
41 410 days
Weir and Intake
42 Excavation Stage-I 45 days
43 Foundation Treatment Stage-I 45 days
44 Reinforced Concrete in Weir Stage-I 110 days
45 Reinforced Concrete in Intake Structure Stage-I 60 days
46 Installations of Trash racks Stage-I 30 days
47 Installations of Control and Flushing Gates Stage-I 45 days
48 Excavation Stage-II 45 days
49 Foundation Treatment Stage-I 45 days
50 Reinforced Concrete in Weir Stage-II 100 days
51 Reinforced Concrete in Intake Structure Stage-II 60 days
52 Installations of Trash racks Stage-II 30 days
53 Installations of Control and Flushing Gates Stage-II 45 days
54 405 days
Sand Trap
55 Excavation 60 days
56 Reinforced Concrete in Sand Trap Chambers 180 days
57 Installations of Mechanical Embedded Parts 60 days
58 Installations of Trash racks 45 days
59 Installations of Control Gates 90 days
60 180 days
Cut and Cover Power Conduits
61 Surface Excavations 30 days
Project: Jabori HPP Task Split Milestone Project Summary Split Milestone
Date: Fri 7/16/10 Project Guide: Critical Task Progress Summary Project Guide: Critical Task Progress Summary
Page 1 of 2 Farooq Bhutta

FIG: 11.1
Overall Implimentation Programme Including Construction Schedule
ID Task Name Duration Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
62 Pouring of Lean Concrete 15 days

63 Concrete in conduit Bed and Walls 60 days
64 Concrete in conduit top Roof 60 days
65 Back Filling 15 days
66 360 days
Power Tunnel
67 Portal Excavations 30 days
68 Underground Excavations 360 days
69 Shotcreting and Rock Bolting 330 days
70 Reinforced Concrete in Inlet and Outlet Structures 60 days
71 Reinforced Concrete in Power Tunnel Lining 218 days
72 300 days
Surge Shaft
74 Underground Excavations 90 days
75 Shotcreting and Rock Bolting 120 days
76 Reinforced Concrete in Portals 30 days
77 Reinforced Concrete in Surge Shaft Lining 120 days
78 368 days
Penstock
79 Alignment for Penstock 15 days
81 Fabrication of Steel Liner 163 days
82 Erection of Steel Liner 130 days
83 Reinforced Concrete in Anchor Blocks for Penstock 180 days
84 714 days
Power House
87 Foundation Treatment 30 days
88 Fabrication and Fixing of Doors & Windows 90 days
89 Architectural Works 180 days
90 380 days
Concrete
91 Concrete in Foundations 80 days
92 Reinforced Concrete in Draft tubes 120 days
93 Reinforced Concrete in Turbine Floor and Walls 120 days
94 Reinforced Concrete in Superstructure 120 days
95 Powerhouse 2nd Stage Concrete 90 days
96 Installation of Embedded Parts of Unit -1 90 days
97 Installation of Embedded Parts of Unit -2 90 days
98 713 days
Electrical and Mechanical Works
99 623 days
Unit-1
100 Fabrication and Delivery of Embedded Parts 260 days
101 Munufacting and Transport Other Equipment 260 days
102 Erection of Turbine and other Equipment 43 days
103 Erection of Generator and other Equipment 30 days
104 Dry Testing 60 days
105 Wet testing and Commissioning 90 days
106 453 days
Unit-2
107 Fabrication and Delivery of Embedded Parts 180 days
108 Munufacting and Transport Other Equipment 103 days
109 Erection of Turbine and other Equipment 60 days
110 Erection of Generator and other Equipment 33 days
111 Dry Testing 60 days
112 Wet testing and Commissioning 90 days
113 180 days
Tailrace
116 Reinforced Concrete in Tailrace 90 days
117 Installations of Mechanical Embedded Parts and Gates 60 days
118 330 days
Transmission Interconnection
119 Construction of Powerhouse Switchyard 120 days
120 Construction of Transmission Line 210 days
121 1 day
Start of Commercial Operation
122 Taking over Certificate 1 day
Project: Jabori HPP Task Split Milestone Project Summary Split Milestone
Date: Fri 7/16/10 Project Guide: Critical Task Progress Summary Project Guide: Critical Task Progress Summary
Page 2 of 2 Farooq Bhutta

CHAPTER
12
ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL

EVALUATIONS
CHAPTER 12
ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL EVALUATIONS
12.1 Economic Analysis
12.1.1 General
Standard approach and methodology has been adopted for undertaking the economic
analysis of the 6.5 MW Jabori Hydropower Project.
The investment cost of this project has been estimated as Rs.1660.858 Million including
price escalation physical contingencies and interest during construction. The objective of
the economic analysis is to determine:
whether the project is beneficial for the economy of Pakistan; and
to assess the economic viability of the project over its economic life
The following sections present economic analysis of Jabori Hydropower Project.
12.1.2 Methodology for the Economic Analysis
To demonstrate economic feasibility of the Jabori Hydropower Project, the alternative cost
approach is used. In the alternative cost approach, the life-cycle cost of Jabori Hydropower
Project is compared with the life-cycle cost of alternative thermal power plants. The
Consultants used the alternative cost approach because it is clear, understandable, suitable
and internationally acceptable particularly for projects up to 50 MW size.
Candidate alternative thermal power plants include simple-cycle gas turbine, combined
cycle plant and slow or medium speed diesel generating sets.
12.1.3 Thermal Power Plant Parameters
The costs and related parameters used in the analysis for the alternative thermal power
plants are shown in Table-12.1.
12.1.4 Assumptions
The economic analysis is based on the following input parameters and assumptions:
All the cost and benefits have been expressed at price level of June, 2010 Economic
analysis is based on economic prices derived by applying various conversion factors.
Shadow prices have been used in economic analysis; market prices being distorted a
result of government intervention and trade unions. For converting financial prices to
economic prices the following conversion factors have been applied.
Standard Conversion Factor = 0.9
Unskilled Labour = 0.75
Skilled Labour = 1.00%
12-1
Cement = 0.75
Steel = 0.81
The base cost of the project has been converted to the economic cost by applying
various conversion factors which comes to Rs.1,066.14 million. All transfer payments
such as custom duties, price escalation (local as well as foreign) and interest during
construction have been excluded from economic cost.
The economic value of the hydropower project is the anticipated total cost of delivering
about 41 GWh per annum which shall be sold to PESCO/PEPCO through existing Grid
System.
The capital cost of alternative candidate thermal power plants is based on typical index
US$/kW installed costs as explained in the Table referred supra.
The completion/ implementation of the project is stretched over thirty two months
exclusive of fifteen months as pre-construction activities period. Therefore, it is
assumed that project implementation would start from January 2012 and completed by
August 2014. The construction period of project activities, is apportioned as follows:
Year-1 Year-2 Year-3
20% 50% 30%
A work-wise breakdown of June 2010 costs at constant price level is illustrated in

Table-12.2.
As the purpose of the economic analysis is to test the investment in hydroelectric

project is worthwhile from a natural resource utilization standpoint, certain costs such
as working capital, commissions and taxes incurred in a private sector development
scenario are not included in the economic analysis. In addition, annual water charges
paid to Govt. of Kyhber Pakhtunkwa (as stated in the Power Policy 2002) are not
included in the economic analysis because these are not true economic costs and are
merely transfers from one Government account to another.
The analysis considers a 50-year useful economic life of the Project.

Replacement/refurbishment costs are considered for equivalent thermal plants which
have lesser economic lives of 25 years for simple cycle gas turbine and combined
cycle plants, and 20 years diesel power plant,
Although the Jabori Hydropower Project as well as alternative thermal plants will have
some residual value at the end of analysis period, in terms of present worth it has
negligible impact and has, therefore, been ignored in the economic analysis.
12.1.5 Results of Economic Analysis
Results of economic comparison of Jabori Hydropower Plant with alternative equivalent

thermal power plants are summarized in Table-12.3.
The EIRR calculated in comparison with equivalent thermal plant, ranges from 16% to 20%
which clearly proves the economic viability of the project.
12-2
Details are given at Tables-12.4 to 12.6.
12.1.6 Sensitivity Analysis
To test the robustness of the economic appraisal of the project, a sensitivity analysis has
been carried out. This test has been performed only for the combined cycle plant thermal
equivalent as this is the alternative showing least benefits in favor of the proposed project.
The robustness of this analysis would thus qualify other alternatives. The summary of the
results of sensitivity analysis is presented as under:
BC
Scenario EIRR %
Ratio
Cost increase by 10% 14.90% 1.15
Benefit Decrease by 10% 14.67% 1.14
Combination of above 12.65% 1.03
The results of sensitivity analysis also prove the project to be economically viable and
feasible as the EIRR remains above 12% and the BC ratio exceeds one for all scenarios.
Besides, the evaluation of sensitivity of the project has also been described by showing line
diagram at Figure-12.1. While developing the line diagram, sensitivity has been tested upto
the variation of 40% in costs and benefits.
12.1.7 Certified Emission Reduction (CER)

To estimate environmental benefits under Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), it has
been estimated as to how many tons of air pollution would be emitted if the Jabori
Hydropower was generated by a thermal alternative. It is assumed that the same firm
energy would be produced either by simple cycle gas plant; or by a combined cycle plant; or
by using diesel plant as the thermal equivalent.
The calculated releases of carbon dioxide per kWh are 0.45 kg for simple cycle gas turbine
and combined cycle plants whereas 0.82 kg for a diesel plant. Therefore, a one GWh
reduction in hydroelectric power will result in approximately 820 ton of increase in CO 2 if the
electricity is to be replaced by the diesel plant and 450 ton increase if the electricity is to be
produced by gas plants.
The Jabori Hydropower Project will generate 41 GWh per annum, as such the project will
avoid emission of about 33,620 ton per annum of CO 2 if compared to diesel plant as an
equivalent thermal plant. It may reduce about 18,450 ton per annum of CO 2 if gas plant is
considered as an alternative source of energy production. To monetize the emission of CO 2
by the project, US$ 10 per ton of CO 2 has been taken. The monetary value of CO 2 has
been added in the cash flow for re-estimating the EIRR. The results are summarized below.
Adding CER Benefits if Compared to

Alternate Source of Producing EIRR % BC Ratio
energy
Simple Cycle Gas Turbine 22.04 1.60
12-3
Combined Cycle Plant 17.22 1.26

Slow or Medium Speed Diesel Plant 21.21 1.53
Key; CER=Certified Emission Reduction of CO 2 ; EIRR = Economic Internal Rate of Return
12.1.8 Conclusion
The results reveal that this project is economically viable as the EIRR is greater than the
opportunity cost of capital. Therefore, making investment in this project does not involve any
risk and is hence recommended for implementation.
12.2 Financial Analysis
12.2.1 Introduction
Financial analysis deals with only costs and returns to project participants and primarily
involves assessment of financial impact, judgment of efficient resource use, assessment of
incentives, and coordination of financial contribution with financial management
competence. Economic analysis on the other hand deals with costs and returns to society
as a whole and the desirability of carrying out the project from the standpoint of its
contribution to the development of the national economy justifying the use of scarce
resources such as capital, skilled labour and managerial talents. The main objective of
financial analysis is to determine the requirements of funds/time and the expected returns
on investment from the points of view of various parties involved in the financing of the
project. The rationale behind these exercises is to provide the decision-makers with
financial and economic yardsticks for the selection/rejection of projects from among
competing alternative proposals for investment.
The techniques of project appraisal can be divided under two heads i.e. (i) Undiscounted
and (ii) discounted. Undiscounted techniques include (a) Pay back period, and (b) Profit &
Loss account. Discounted techniques take into account the time value of money and include
(a) Internal Rate of Return (IRR) (b) Net Present Value (NPV) and (c) Benefit Cost Ratio
(BCR).
12.2.2 Methodology
12.2.2.1 General Approach
This analysis will identify and asses whether the project is financially viable to produce
electricity at affordable rates. The calculation is based on the capital expenditures and
operating costs, applying relevant parameters. These are based on specific prices for
maintenance and personnel, as well as figures like interest rates, financing terms etc. The
uncertainty of prices and cost levels varying during the project period are assessed by the
sensitivity analysis.
One main result of the financial analysis for the considered case will be the levelized power
cost (LPC) over the life of the project, currently envisaged to be 50 years.
12-4
For financial assessment of the erection of Jabori Hydropower Project the approach taken is
as follows:
The average annual costs, including capital recovery cost for capital expenditure
(CAPEX) will be calculated. This includes the O&M cost, the projected loan
repayments, and a return on investment made on the project. One major result is the
specific average power cost (APC) on a Pak Rs./kWh basis which can be calculated
for the overall operation period.
Using the above (APC) over the life of the transaction, a net present value (NPV) of
the stream of average power cost is calculated at a certain discount rate for FEC as
well as Local component. This NPV is then converted into a levelized power cost over
the operation period, once again using the same discount rates.
Both the calculations are based on the commercial operation date (COD) as the starting
point for this calculation. Figure below shows the procedure for the financial evaluation
Procedure for financial evaluation
Input Data Annual & Cash flow Calculations

specified Levelized Power Cost
Technical Input Data Sensitivity Analysis,

CAPEX Loan Terms CAPEX, Load
Factor & Operation APC
Financial Input Data LPC

CAPEX Loan Terms
12.2.2.2 Financial Model
For the project various questions and decisions with regard to the financial outcome have to
be taken into account. In the framework of the project, a Model has been developed. It
offers transparency with regard to calculations and assumptions. Its modular structure
allows for easy and rapid adjustment geared toward specific project requirements and takes
due consideration of potential changes in technical and financial parameters through
sensitivity analyses.
Figure below shows schematically the main input and output data of the Model. Main input
parameters are:
General data and selection of cases;
Technical data like plant capacity and load factor;
Financial/economic input like inflation escalation rates, and discount rate;
Breakdown and schedule of capital expenditures (CAPEX);
Financial Plan;
Operation & Maintenance (O&M) costs.
12-5
The output of the Model is dependent on the case it is used for main output data of the
Model are:
Cash flow and financing projections;
Average power cost (APC) and levelized power costs (LPC);
Main Input and Output Data of the Module
General Technical / CAPEX budget Financing plan O&M projection

options financial data
INPUT
Technical/ financial project simulation
OUTPUT Cash flow and financing projections Levelized power costs, Sensitivity analysis
tariffs
12.2.3 Financial Structure of the Project
The prime objective of the implementation of Jaobri Hydropower Project with a total
installed capacity of 6.5 MW and annual energy generation of about 41 MkWh is to provide
cheaper and most needed power. Summary of yearly estimated project base costs and
financial costs of the Project are given in Table 12.7.
12.2.4 Terms of Loan
The repayment of the loan would be made in the form of annual amortization charges
whereby the principal and interest charges would be repaid in equal annual installments.
The rate of mark-up fixed by the GOP for current financial year is 13.17% as notified by the
Ministry of Finance, Government of Pakistan for 2009-2010.
12.2.5 Annual Recurring Expenditure
The annual recurring expenditure included amortization of total project costs worked out
using 13.17% rate of interest per annum; and O&M Costs worked out on annual basis @
2.5% of the total project costs.
12.2.6 Assumptions for the Financial Analysis
For the sake of financial analysis in hand, following assumptions have been made:
i. Interest Rate: Interest rates for public entity project are determined by the
Ministry of Finance, GoP. The mark up rate for 2009-2010 fixed by the
Ministry of Finance GoP as 13.17% on local as well as on foreign loan, has
been used in financial analysis. As per practice in WAPDA and Planning
Commission simple interest rate has been calculated during construction.
12-6
ii. Import Duty: As per policy for power generation projects, 2002 the Govt. has
given fiscal incentive which allow to include custom duties at the rate of 5%
on the import of electric and mechanical equipments, not manufactured
locally in financial cost of the project.
iii. Exchange Rate: In view the existence of the freely floating exchange rate in
Pakistan the calculation of shadow exchange rate is not necessary as would
be the case if the exchange rate was not floating. The exchange rate
prevailing of the price index of cost estimates level has been used as
1US$=Rs. 85.00 as on June 2010.
iv. Discount Rate: The discount rate is used to reflect that investment represents
foregone consumption with the expectation of receiving profit or interest rate.
Consumption in future is shown less than consumption today as such future
consumption is discounted at the rate equal to the time preference discount
rate. The appropriate value of this time preference discount rate is the
opportunity cost of capital. The selection of proper discount rate is thus highly
important. The implication of high discount rate discourages investment and
growth. For this project 12% discount rate has been applied which is also
being used by the Planning Commission, GoP and other National and
International Planning Agencies.
v. Sale Price: The average sale price of Rs. 5.14 per kWh of 20082009 (refer
Cost Accounting Cell of WAPDA) has been projected at the rate of 5% per
annum to the commissioning year of the project, making sale price as Rs.
6.89 per kWh and thereafter it has been kept constant throughout the life of
the project.
vi. Annual O&M Cost: The annual O&M charges have been worked out @ 2.5%
of the total cost which also covers the major overhauling of the plant after
every ten years. This arrangement has been assumed to be constant for the
economic life of the Project - 50 years.
vii. Price Escalation: Various price indices are used for projection purpose. Such
as GDP Deflation (local and foreign). Consumer Price Index (CPI) and
Wholesale Price Index (WPI). In this study GDP deflation of 6.5% and 2.5%
for local and foreign cost components have been applied to estimate financial
cost of the project. Since GDP is based on all goods produced in the
economy and is used to measure inflation and escalation project costs, hence
the same has been proposed for cost escalation purpose.
viii. Period of Investigation: A useful operation time of 50 years has been
considered for the project. The construction period is taken as 32 months
exclusive of fifteen months as pre construction activities. It starts in January
2012 at the earliest with the financial closure of the project in August 2014. The
operation period lasts from September 2014 until the August 2064. The calendar
year starts at 1st January and ends at 31st December.
ix. Auxiliary Consumption: Auxiliary consumption has been assumed as 2% of the
energy generated as per latest Electricity Marketing Data (Power System
Statistics) Planning (Power) Department (NTDC)
12-7
12.2.6.1 Results of Financial Analysis
The financial analysis, carried out on the basis of the above assumptions, gives Financial
Internal Rate of Return (FIRR) as 14.62% which indicates that the Jabori Hydropower
Project is also financially viable as its FIRR is higher than the borrowing rate. Details are
tabulated in Table-12.8.
12.2.7 Unit Costs
The cost per kWh of energy generated has been estimated by dividing average annual
recurring cost with annual generation over the economic life of the project. The average
annual recurring cost is arrived at by amortizing the total financial cost of Rs. 1660.858
million (Local Rs. 1335.29 million and FEC Rs. 325.56) including Physical Contingencies
@5%, Price Escalation @ 6.5% and 2.5% on local and foreign cost components and
Interest during construction at the interest rate of 13.17% for local and foreign cost
respectively for 20 years and levelized over the useful life of the project. To this has also
been added annual O&M cost of Rs. 41.52 million (2.5% of the total cost of project) which
gives annual recurring cost of Rs. 137.06 million. Table-12.9 may be referred to in this
regard for detailed calculation, however results are summarized below:
i. Installed Capacity of the Project (MW) 6.5

ii. Units Generated per annum (MkWh) 41.000
iii. Generation & Transmission losses @ 2% MkWh 0.82
iii. Units available for sale (MkWh) 40.18
iv. Annual recurring cost (Million Rs.) 137.06
v) Cost per unit generated (Rs/kWh) 3.34
vi) Cost per unit available for sale (Rs./kWh) 3.41
vii) Total revenue of the project @ sale price of Rs.6.89 / kWh 276.76
viii) Installed cost per MW M Rs. 255.52
12.2.8 Estimated Revenues
The following Table shows estimated revenues against sale of energy for the first ten years
of the project.
Estimated Revenue for first 10 years of the project
S. No. Calendar Cash Inflow Cash Outflow

Year Total Cash
Amortization Outflow
O&M
(IDO)
1 2015 276.764 197.162 41.521 238.683
2 2016 276.764 194.775 41.521 236.296
3 2017 276.764 192.072 41.521 234.241
4 2018 276.764 189.014 41.521 230.535
5 2019 276.764 185.553 41.521 227.074
6 2020 276.764 181.637 41.521 223.158
7 2021 276.764 177.204 41.521 218.725
8 2022 276.764 172.188 41.521 213.707
9 2023 276.764 166.511 41.521 208.032
10 2024 276.764 160.087 41.521 201.608
Total 2767.640 1816.205 415.210 2231.416
12-8
Project Investment Cost Rs. 1660.858

Salvage Value without replacement Cost Rs. 166.086
Net Investment Rs. 1494.772
Total Expected Income for first ten years Rs. 2767.640
Total Expected Income/Net Investment Ratio for first ten years 1.85:1
12.2.9 Payback Period
The payback period of the project is five years.
12.2.10 Profit and Loss Statement
Profit and loss statement of the project is shown in Table-12.10.
12.2.11 Benefits of the Project
a) Quantifiable Benefits
The project will generate 41 GWh energy annually.
The project depicts Financial Internal Rate of Return as 14.62% and BC Ratio as
1.68:1 which makes the project financially viable.
The generation cost kWh worked out to be Rs. 3.343 (3.933 US cents) over the
useful life of the project is very attractive to reflect the financial benefits of the
project.
Improvement in the presently low voltage being experienced by the consumers
Facilitate economic and optimal utilization of electric power vis--vis reducing the
energy losses.
Savings in fuel imports.
Clean Development Mechanism.(CDM) benefits displace 33,620 tons of CO 2 if

compared with diesel plant and 18,450 tons if compared with gas turbine.
b) Non-quantifiable Benefits
i) The hydel projects need extensive civil works, and can create significant number of job
opportunities for engineers, technicians, skilled and unskilled labour in execution and
operation of the project. Largely domestic resources to be utilized will make the project
invulnerable to unseen eventualities associated with the thermal power plants.
The project is envisaged to bring about economic uplift activities of far reaching effects in
the project area, in particular as the pace of electrification would be accelerated with
addition in the generating capacity. The fast urbanization has also increased the demand for
electricity in the households. Regional households are now using a greater number of
electrical gadgets and appliances.
12-9
The project will provide incentive for the establishment of small and medium sized industries
based on local raw materials, creating gainful employment opportunities to the increasing
work force. This will help in alleviative disguised unemployment in agriculture sector.
Providing a basic infrastructural facility of electricity in rural areas goes a long way in
checking large scale migration of rural labour force to urban centers.
Higher per capita disposable income would create more opportunities for, improved health,
and education. It would provide incentives to the work force to live near their homes and
tendency to migrate to main urban centers would be reduced.
12.2.12 Conclusion
The financial analysis clearly indicates that the executing agency can very easily repay its
loan installment of Rs 215.293 million, while the FIRR as 14.62% indicates the project as
financially viable. The proposed scheme has no significant negative impact on any financial
or economic resources.
12-10
TABLES
Table-12.1
Alternative Thermal Power Plant Assumptions and Cost Summary
Open (Simple)
Combined Slow/Medium
Description Cycle Gas
Cycle Plant Speed Diesel
Turbine
Capital Cost, Excluding Interest
450 650 500
during Construction (US$/kW)
Implementation Period (Years) 1.75 2 1.5
Auxiliary Consumption (%) 1.5% 2% 1.5%
Sent Out Efficiency (%) 31% 49% 41%
Fixed O&M Cost (US$/kW/month) 1.3 2.0 3.0
Variable O&M Cost (US$/MWh) 1.5 2.5 5.0
Fuel Cost (US Cents/kWh) 6.707 4.242 5.184
Equipment Life (Years) 25 25 20
Refurbishment Cost (US$/kW) 380 550 425
Table-12.2
Summary of Cost Estimate
Sr. Cost in Million Rupees

Description
No.
Local Foreign Total
A
PRELIMINARY WORKS 92.700 - 92.700
B
ENVIRONMENT AND RESETTLEMENT COST 68.202 - 68.202
C
CIVIL WORKS 534.749 - 534.749
D
ELECTRICAL AND MECHENICAL WORKS 127.680 271.110 398.790
F Detail Design and Tender Documents @ 2% 16.467 5.422 21.889
G Client Expenses, Administration and Legal Costs @ 3% 24.700 8.133 32.833
H Engineering and Supervision Costs @ 4% 32.933 10.844 43.778

Physical Contingencies @5%
I 41.167 13.556 54.722
J Total Base Cost 938.598 309.065 1,247.663
Table-12.3
Economic Comparison Indicators
Economic Indicators for Jabori

EIRR BC Ratio
HPP when compared to:
Simple Cycle Gas Turbine 20.73% 1.52

Combined Cycle Plant 15.59% 1.18
Slow or Medium Speed Diesel Plant 18.69% 1.27
Table-12.4
Economic Analysis Using Simple Cycle Gas Turbine Plant As Thermal Equivalent
In Rs.
Million
YEAR PROJECT COSTS PROJECT BENEFITS OF EQ.THERMAL PLANT NET
YEAR OF CAPITAL REFURB. O&M TOTAL CAPITAL REFURB. O&M FUEL TOTAL BENEFITS
OPERATION COST COST COST COST COST COST COST
1 213.228 213.228 - 0.000 (213.228)
2 533.070 533.070 149.175 149.175 (383.895)
3 319.842 319.842 99.450 99.450 (220.392)
4 1 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
5 2 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
6 3 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
7 4 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
8 5 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
9 6 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
10 7 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
11 8 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
12 9 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
13 10 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
14 11 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
15 12 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
16 13 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
17 14 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
18 15 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
19 16 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
20 17 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
21 18 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
22 19 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
23 20 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
24 21 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
25 22 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
26 23 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
27 24 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
28 25 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
29 26 31.984 41.521 73.506 119.340 13.847 233.750 366.937 293.431
30 27 79.961 41.521 121.482 79.560 13.847 233.750 327.157 205.675
31 28 47.976 41.521 89.498 13.847 233.750 247.597 158.099
32 29 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
33 30 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
34 31 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
35 32 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
36 33 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
37 34 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
38 35 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
39 36 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
40 37 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
41 38 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
42 39 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
43 40 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
44 41 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
45 42 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
46 43 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
47 44 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
48 45 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
49 46 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
50 47 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
51 48 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
52 49 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
53 50 41.521 41.521 13.847 233.750 247.597 206.075
1066.140
SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC INDICES
Benefit/Cost Ratio @ 12% discount rate 1.518

EIRR 20.73%
Table-12.5
Economic Analysis Using Combined Cycle Plant As Thermal Equivalent
In Rs.
Million
YEAR OF CAPITAL REFURB O&M TOTAL CAPITAL REFURB. O&M FUEL TOTAL BENEFITS
1 213.228 213.228 - - - - -213.228
2 533.070 533.070 233.431 - - 233.431 -299.639
3 319.842 319.842 125.694 - - 125.694 -194.148
4 1 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
5 2 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
6 3 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
7 4 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
8 5 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
9 6 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
10 7 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
11 8 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
12 9 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
13 10 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
14 11 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
15 12 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
16 13 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
17 14 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
18 15 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
19 16 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
20 17 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
21 18 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
22 19 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
23 20 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
24 21 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
25 22 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
26 23 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
27 24 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
28 25 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
29 26 31.984 41.521 73.506 186.745 21.973 147.867 356.584 283.079
30 27 79.961 41.521 121.482 100.555 21.973 147.867 270.394 148.912
31 28 47.976 41.521 89.498 21.973 147.867 169.839 80.341
32 29 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
33 30 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
34 31 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
35 32 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
36 33 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
37 34 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
38 35 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
39 36 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
40 37 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
41 38 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
42 39 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
43 40 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
44 41 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
45 42 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
46 43 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
47 44 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
48 45 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
49 46 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
50 47 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
51 48 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
52 49 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
53 50 41.521 41.521 21.973 147.867 169.839 128.318
1066.140

EIRR 15.59%
Table-12.6
Economic Analysis Using Diesel Plant as Thermal Equivalent
In Rs.
Million
YEAR OF CAPITAL REFURB. O&M TOTAL CAPITAL REFURB. O&M FUEL TOTAL BENEFITS
1 213.228 213.228 - - - - -213.228
2 533.070 533.070 165.750 - - 165.750 -367.320
3 319.842 41.521 319.842 110.500 37.315 180.662 110.500 -209.342
4 1 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 127.646 86.125
5 2 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
6 3 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
7 4 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
8 5 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
9 6 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
10 7 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
11 8 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
12 9 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
13 10 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
14 11 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
15 12 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
16 13 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
17 14 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
18 15 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
19 16 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
20 17 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
21 18 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
22 19 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
23 20 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
24 21 31.984 41.521 73.506 132.600 37.315 180.662 350.577 277.072
25 22 79.961 41.521 121.482 88.400 37.315 180.662 306.377 184.895
26 23 47.976 41.521 89.498 37.315 180.662 217.977 128.480
27 24 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
28 25 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
29 26 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
30 27 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
31 28 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
32 29 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
33 30 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
34 31 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
35 32 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
36 33 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
37 34 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
38 35 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
39 36 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
40 37 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
41 38 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
42 39 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
43 40 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
44 41 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
45 42 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
46 43 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
47 44 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
48 45 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
49 46 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
50 47 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
51 48 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
52 49 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
53 50 41.521 41.521 37.315 180.662 217.977 176.456
1066.140

EIRR 18.69%
Table-12.7
Year Wise Breakup of Summary of Project Cost Estimates
In Rs. Million
Year-I Year-II Year-III Total Year Wise Cost

Sr. No. Description
Local Foreign Total Local Foreign Total Local Foreign Total Local Foreign Total
A 18.540 - 18.540 46.350 - 46.350 27.810 - 27.810 92.700 - 92.700

Preliminary Works
Environment and Resettlement
B 13.640 - 13.640 34.101 - 34.101 20.461 - 20.461 68.202 - 68.202
Cost
C 106.950 - 106.950 267.374 - 267.374 160.425 - 160.425 534.749 - 534.749
Civil Works
Electrical and Mechanical
D 25.536 54.222 79.758 63.840 135.555 199.395 38.304 81.333 119.637 127.680 271.110 398.790
Works
E 164.666 54.222 218.888 411.666 135.555 547.221 246.999 81.333 328.332 823.331 271.110 1,094.441
Sub-Total (A+B+C+D)
Detail Design and Tender
3.293 1.084 4.378 8.233 2.711 10.944 4.940 1.627 6.567 16.467 5.422 21.889
F Documents @ 2%
Client Expenses,Administration
4.940 1.627 6.567 12.350 4.067 16.417 7.410 2.440 9.850 24.700 8.133 32.833
G and Legal Costs @ 3%
Engineering and Supervision
6.587 2.169 8.756 16.467 5.422 21.889 9.880 3.253 13.133 32.933 10.844 43.778
H Costs @ 4%
8.233 2.711 10.944 20.583 6.778 27.361 12.350 4.067 16.417 41.167 13.556 54.722
I Physical Contingencies @5%
187.720 61.813 249.533 469.299 154.533 623.832 281.579 92.720 374.299 938.598 309.065 1,247.663
J TOTAL BASE COSTS
Import duties and charges
2.711 - 2.711 6.778 - 6.778 4.067 - 4.067 13.556 - 13.556
K (5%)
12.202 1.545 13.747 62.992 7.823 70.815 58.554 7.129 65.684 133.748 16.498 150.246
L Price Escalation
38.80 11.08 49.879 97.00 27.70 124.697 58.20 16.62 74.818 194.000 55.393 249.394
M Interest during construction
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 241.433 74.437 315.870 636.069 190.052 826.121 402.400 116.467 518.867 1,279.902 380.956 1,660.858
Table-12.8
Financial Analysis Jabori Hydropower Project
Rs. Million
PROJECT COSTS PROJECT BENEFITS
Energy NET
Years Energy Sale Price Benefits
Capital Refurb. Available
O&M Cost Total Cost Generated Paisas from Sale BENEFITS
Cost Cost for Sale
MkWh /kWh of Energy
MkWh
1 282.293 282.293 - - (282.29)
2 705.732 705.732 - - (705.73)
3 423.439 423.439 - - (423.44)
4 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
5 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
6 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
7 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
8 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
9 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
10 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
11 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
12 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
13 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
14 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
15 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
16 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
17 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
18 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
19 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
20 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
21 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
22 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
23 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
24 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
25 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
26 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
27 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
28 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
29 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
30 42.344 41.521 83.865 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 192.90
31 105.860 41.521 147.381 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 129.38
32 63.516 41.521 105.037 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 171.73
33 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
34 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
35 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
36 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
37 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
38 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
39 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
40 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
41 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
42 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
43 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
44 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
45 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
46 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
47 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
48 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
49 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
50 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
51 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
52 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
53 41.521 41.521 41.000 40.180 6.89 276.764 235.24
1411.464
SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL INDICES

FIRR 14.62%
Table-12.9
Cost Per kWh and kW
S.No Description Rs. In Million
1 Base Cost 1,247.663
a) Local 938.598
b) FEC 309.065
2 Import Duties and Taxes @ 5% 13.556
3 Interest During Construction 249.394
a) Local 194.00
b) FEC 55.393
5 Price escalation 150.246
a) Local 133.748
b) FEC 16.498
6 Financial Cost 1,660.858
a) Local 1,335.295
b) FEC 325.56
Amortization @ 13.17% for 20 years &
7
Levelized over 50 years of : 95.540
a) Amortization of Local Costs 76.812

b) Amortization of Foreign Costs 18.728
8 Operation & Maintenance cost @ 2.5% of Total Cost 41.521
9 Annual Recurring Cost 137.061
10 Annual Energy generated GWh 41.000
11 Annual Energy available for sale GWh 40.180
i. Cost per unit generated in Rs. 3.343

ii. Cost per unit generation in USc 3.933
12 Cost per unit available for sale in Rs. 3.411
13 Cost per unit available for sale in Usc. 4.013
14 Installed Capacity (MW) 6.500
i. Installed cost per MW in Rs. 255.517
ii. Installed cost per MW in US$. 3.006

Table-12.10
Profit & Loss Statement- Jabori Hydropower Project
(Costs in Rs. Million)
Cash Cash Out Flow

Profit (+) or
Years Inflow/
Interest O&M Charges Depreciation Total Losses(-)
Revenue
1 276.764 197.162 41.521 59.791 298.475 (21.711)
2 276.764 194.775 41.521 59.791 296.087 (19.323)
3 276.764 192.072 41.521 59.791 293.385 (16.621)
4 276.764 189.014 41.521 59.791 290.327 (13.563)
5 276.764 185.553 41.521 59.791 286.866 (10.102)
6 276.764 181.637 41.521 59.791 282.949 (6.186)
7 276.764 177.204 41.521 59.791 278.517 (1.753)
8 276.764 172.188 41.521 59.791 273.500 3.263
9 276.764 166.511 41.521 59.791 267.824 8.940
10 276.764 160.087 41.521 59.791 261.399 15.364
11 276.764 152.816 41.521 59.791 254.129 22.635
12 276.764 144.588 41.521 59.791 245.900 30.863
13 276.764 135.276 41.521 59.791 236.589 40.175
14 276.764 124.738 41.521 59.791 226.050 50.713
15 276.764 112.812 41.521 59.791 214.124 62.639
16 276.764 99.315 41.521 59.791 200.628 76.136
17 276.764 84.041 41.521 59.791 185.354 91.410
18 276.764 66.755 41.521 59.791 168.068 108.696
19 276.764 47.193 41.521 59.791 148.505 128.258
20 276.764 25.054 41.521 59.791 126.367 150.397

FIGURES
Figure-12.1
Jabori Hydropower project

Sensitivity Analysis - Response to ERR (%) Under Different Scenarios
40
Value of ERR % - in Response to Change in Benefits
35
30
25
& Costs
20
15
10
5 Scenarios: Percentage Changes in Costs and Benefits:

a: Change in Costs +40% t0 -40%
b: Change in Benefits +40% to -40%
0
-40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40
Changes in Costs Change in Benefits Base Case

CHAPTER
13
CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
CHAPTER 13
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions
- Jabori site on Siran River offer an attractive location for development of 6.5 MW
Hydroelectric Project which has been found technically feasible. Once fully
commissioned, the project will generate 41.00 GWh annually.
- From the day detailed engineering design, tendering and notice to proceed is issued to
the contractor, the project can be fully commissioned in 32 months.
- Capital cost of the project is estimated as Rs. 1,660.86 million.
- Environmental Impact Assessment Studies have determined the overall impact rating of
the project activities as low adverse.
- Economic analysis of the project reveals that the project is economically viable as the
Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) is greater than the opportunity cost of capital.
The EIRR calculated in comparison with equivalent thermal plants as replacement of the
proposed Hydropower Project ranges from 16 to 21 percent.
- Results of sensitivity analysis also endorse the viability of the project as the EIRR
remains well above 12% and the cost: benefit ratio remains more than 1.0.
- Financial analysis indicates a Financial Internal Rate of Return (FIRR) as 14.62% and
the project is adjudged viable. Unit cost per KWH will be Rs. 3.34/KWh.
The loan installment of Rs. 215.29 million per year is found to be repayable, by the
executing agency, easily.
Recommendation
- Engineering, economic and financial studies have classified Jabori Hydropower Project
as viable. Hence the project is recommended for detailed engineering design and
execution.
- Collection of hydrology data be continued.
- In the next phase of studies, some additional field studies, investigation and laboratory
testing has been envisaged. These include the confirmatory geological and geotechnical
studies of the field condition, detailed mapping and topographic survey. About 300 m
drilling at the structure location and along the power tunnel route along with test pits and
the laboratory testing etc. shall be required for assessing the need of the low alkali
cement, in view of the ASR potential of the concrete materials available at site.
13 - 1

Vol - I - Main Report (Final Draft) PDF

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Vol - I - Main Report (Final Draft) PDF

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Government of KP

SARHAD HYDEL DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION

FEASIBILITY STUDIES OF THREE HYDROPOWER PLANTS

FEASIBILITY REPORT (Final Draft)

VOLUME I MAIN REPORT

ASSOCIATED CONSULTING ENGINEERS ACE (PVT) LTD.

JABORI HYDROPOWER PROJECT

FINAL FEASIBILITY REPORT

Sr. No Description Page No

1.1 Background 1-1

1.2 Feasibility Studies Consultancy Contract 1-1

1.3 Present Feasibility Report 1-2

2 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY AND SATELLITE IMAGES (GIS)

2.1 General 2-1

2.2 Scope of Work 2-1

2.3 Instruments Used 2-1

2.4 Survey Maps 2-2

2.5 Traversing 2-3

2.6 Location of Survey Control Points 2-3

2.7 Establishment of Vertical Control 2-3

2.8 Topographical Survey 2-3

2.9 Satellite Images (GIS) 2-3

3 GEOLOGY, GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION

3.0 Introduction 3-1

3.1 General Project Information 3-1

3.2 Previous Studies 3-1

3.3 Present Studies 3-1

3.4 Topography and Geomorphology of the Project Area 3-2

3.5 Regional Geology and Tectonics 3-2

3.6 Field Investigations 3-3

3.7 Geology and Tectonics of the Project Area 3-5

3.8 Geology of the Reservoir Area 3-8

3.9 Foundation Conditions at Weir Site and Appurtenant Structures 3-9

3.10 Design of Power Facilities 3-13

3.11 Construction Materials 3-30

3.12 Recommendations for Future Investigations 3-36

4 HYDROLOGY AND SEDIMENTATION

4.1 General 4-1

4.2 Data Availability 4-1

4.2.1 Available Reports and Studies 4-1

4.3 Temperatures 4-3

4.4 Sediment Data 4-4

4.5 Water Availability 4-4

4.6 Flood Studies 4-7

4.7 Sedimentation 4-10

4B Post Flood Hydrology

4.8 General 4-14

4.9 Flood Study 4-15

4.10 Flow Study 4-20

4.11 Conclusions 4-22

5.1 General 5-1

5.2 Regional Tectonics 5-2

5.3 Active Faults in the Region 5-4

5.3.3 Main Frontal Thrust (MFT) / Riasi Fault 5-4

5.4 Seismic Hazard Evaluation 5-6

5.5 Attenuation Relationship 5-8

5.6 Maximum Credible Earthquake 5-9

5.7 Operating Basis Earthquake 5-9

5.8 Return Period 5-10

5.9 Conclusions 5-11

6 PROJECT LAYOUT AND HYDRAULIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

6.1 Project Layout 6-1