RESTRICTED For official use only Not for publication UNN42 Vol. 4 REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE INI'ERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE INDUS BASIN DEVELOPMENT FUND STUDY OF THE WATER AND POWER RESOURCES OF WEST PAKISTAN VOLUME II Program for the Development of Irrigation and Agriculture Annex 4. 1 (Pages 1 - 88) Prepared by a Group of the World Bank Staff Headed by Dr. P. Lieftinck July 28, 1967 CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS 4. 76 rupees = U.S. $1. 00 1 rupee = U. S. $0. 21 1 million rupees U.S. $210,000 Annex 4.1 consists of three chapters covering 200 pages. Pages 1 - 88, up to and including the first four Public Tubewell Project Proposals, are bound separately. The subsequent pages 89 - 200, including the last eight Public Tubewell Project Proposals, are bound 'with -nnexes 6.1 - 9.1 INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Program for the Development of Irrigation and Agriculture in West Pakistan VOLUME II ANNEX 4.1 Report on Project Content of Water Development Program for West Pakistan Table of Contents Page INTRODUCTION I. SURFACE WdATER PROJECTS 1 A. Background 1 B. The Tarbela Project 2 1. Project Description 2 2. Tarbela WTater Availability and Distribution 3 3. Cost Estimates and Expenditure Schedule 7 4. Project Evaluation 9 5. Conclusions 18 II. GROUNDW4ATER DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS 21 A. General Aspects of the Projects 21 1. Introduction 21 2. Project Preparation 21 3. Project-'Management 24 4. Recovery of Costs 25 5. General Approach and Design Criteria 25 6. Project- Evailuation 29 7. Ass dd--Agricul-tural Inputs 33 8. Alt-ea0i-ve Private Development 34 Page B. Review of IACA's Public Tubewell Project Proposals 37 1. The Shorkot-Kamalia Project 37 2. The Rohri North Project 51 3. The Panjnad-Abbasia Project 65 4. The Dipalpur Above the B.S. Link Project 77 5. The Shujaabad Project 89 6. The Ravi Syphon - Dipalpur Link Project 101 7. The Fordwah Sadiqia Project 115 8. The Rohri South Project 127 9. The Bahawal Qaim Project 141 10. The Begari Sind Project 155 11. Dipalpur Below The B.S. Link 167 12. The Sukkur Right Bank Project 179 III. DRAINAGE PROJECTS A. Introduction 191 B. The Sukh Beas Drainage 191 1. Description of Project Area 191 2. Physical Works 192 3. Cost Estimates 195 4. Construction Phasing 196 5. Expenditure Schedule 196 6. Drainage Benefits 197 7. Project Evaluation 199 8. Conclusion 200 Map INTRODUCTION i. In the "Guidelines for Comprehensive Study", dated March 26, 1965, IACA was requested to formulate and evaluate water development projects of sufficiently high priority to be included in the Action Program for the period 1965 to 1975. Including Tarbela, IACA formulated and evaluated 14 water development projects in as much detail as the available information supplemented by the findings of the study would permit. Projects were formulated in separate reports and the details are contained in the following volumes of IACA's Comprehensive Report: The Tarbela Project Volume - which is appended in full to this Annex 4.1. Bari Doab Projects - Volume 12 and Volume 12 A. Sutlej and Panjnad Left Bank Projects - Volume IL. Rechna Doab Project - Volume 16. Lower Indus Projects - Volume 20. In addition to the on-going water development activities these projects form the core of the Action Program as outlined in Chapter IV of Volume II of the Bank Group's report. ii. The review by the Bank Group of each of the 14 project proposals is set forth in this annex. While the general priorities for the Action Program have been determined in Chapter III of Volume II of the Bank Group's report the following reviews represent an attempt to assess the technical feasibility and economic viability of each of the project proposals in isolation. The detailed phasing of the projects in the Action Program had to be subject not only to economic priority but also to technical considera- tions and the necessities of project preparation and formulation. The results of the reviews could thus not influence the phasing but provide a further test of the high priority nature of the projects as formulated. iii. All project proposals with the exception of Tarbela and the Sukh Beas Drainage Scheme are tentative formulations of newly identified projects. In the course of detailed project preparation these formulations may be sub- ject to further changes. The value of IACA's work and the following reviews must therefore be seen in that they provide a comprehensive formulation and assessment of high priority investment opportunities identified in the course of the Indus Special Study. AIT NEX 4.1 Page 1 I. SURFACE lTlATEPR. PROJECTS A. Background 1.01 The works required in the field of surface water development and their relative priorities within the period of the Action Program (1965-1975) have been discussed in Chapter III of Volume II. Except for flood control and drainage this would include mainly surface water storage and canal remodelling. As far as the latter activity is con- cerned no definite projects were identified and formulated beyond the indication of specific priorities discussed in Chapter III. Canal remodelling projects are therefore not subject to review in this Annex. 1.02 The only project for surface water storage to be implemented in the course of the Action Program (1965 to 1975) is the Tarbela Dam (see Volume II, Chapter IV). This project has been subject to detailed studies in the first phase of the Indus ;pecial Study. The results of the evaluation were presented in the Banl- Group's "Report on a Dam on the Indus at Tarbela", dated February 15, 1965. In the course of that study various reservoir capacities were evaluated. It was found that a dam providing a live storage capacity of 8.6 MAF with a drawdown level commensurate with the electricity generation requirements (elevation 1,332 feet) would form the most favorable alternative. 1.03 In accordance with the agreements reached wqith the Pakistan authorities a reservoir of this size, available for service by 1974, was then assumed as given for the subsequent water development and water distribution analyses carried out by IACA in the comprehensive phase of the Indus Special Study. This was embodied in the "Guidelines of Comprehensive Study", which were agreed in the Irrigation and Agri- culture Coordinating Committee and issued to IACA on March 26, 1965. For the inclusion of this project in the Action Program, however, the earlier Tarbela evaluation had to be reviewed in the context of basin- wide water development. 1.04 For this purpose the coordinating consultant for the Indus Special Study, -ir Alexander Gibb and Partners, prepared a report entitled "The Tarbela Project. Evaluation of the Tarbela Project within the Development Programme of the Indus Basin", dated November 1966. This report, annexed-herreto as Appendix 1, contains an attempt by the consultant to eval-uate th-e^Tarbela project as an integral part of a comprehensive wattF development program extending beyond the period of the Action Program. -The Bank Group's review of the consultant's evalua- tion is set forth-in-the following sections. A summary of the review is given in Chapter IV,of Volume II of the Bank Group's report. ANNEX 4.1 Page 2 B. The Tarbela Project 1. Project Description -/ 1.05 Initially, the Tarbela reservoir would have a gross storage capacity of 11.1 MAF. Of this 8.6 MAF would be live storage available for irrigation releases. 2/ Because of the high sediment load of the Indus, estimated at 440 million tons annually at Tarbela site, the reservoir is expected to silt up at a rate of 0.12 MAF per annum for the first 20 years. It would be fully depleted to a final volume of one MAF after about 50 years. Figure 8 of Appendix 1 demonstrates the projected pattern of sediment deposition. 1.06 Taking into account the reservoir depletion the quantities of water available for irrigation releases at reference years would be about as follows: Quantities of Stored Water Available for Irrigation Releases at Tarbela Storage Release Available Storage Release Available Period Storage (MAF) Period Storage (MAF) 1975/76 8.48 1999/2000 5.35 1979/80 8.00 2004/2005 4.50 1984/85 7.40 2009/2010 3.65 1989/90 6.80 2024/2025 1.10 In the context of the comprehensive development of West Pakistan's water resources the reductions in the availability from Tarbela would at all stages be more than compensated by the successive exploitation of other water development opportunities (as described in Chapter V of Volume II of the Bank Group's report; see also Appendix 1, Figure 13). 1.07 The releases of the above quantities from Tarbela would follow an operational pattern reflecting aggregate system requirements. The pattern used for planning purposes is based on slightly less than mean water flows in the Indus with priority for irrigation requirements during the winter months. Allowance for electricity generation has been made to 1/ For a description of the physical works see the Bank Group's Report, Annex 1, Volume III, Program for Development of Surface Water Storage. 2/ Based on drawdown level of 1,332 feet. ANNEX 4.1 Page 3 the extent that such release requirements would not conflict with irrigation demands. An operational reserve would be maintained for releases during April and May because greater variations from the mean flow occur more frequently during these months. This would have the added advantage of reducing the need for groundwater pumping and increasing the hydro generation at a time of the year when power caDability would be at its lowest under the proposed power program. On the basis of these considerations the following operational pattern has been established by IACA for the Tarbela reservoir: Tarbela Release Pattern Reservoir Filling Storage Releases Percent Percent Percent Month of Total Month of Total Month of Total June 45 October nil February 26 July 55 November 8 March 19 August nil December 11 April 10 September nil January 21 May 5 100 100 The filling of the reservoir would thus take place over a period of two months while the releases would extend over seven months with peak with- drawals during January, February and March. 1.08 Because of its location on the upper Indus and the construction of trans-Punjab link canals under the Indus Basin Project Tarbela releases could be served directly to any parts of the Indus Basin South and South West of the line formed by the Chasma-Jhelum link and the T.S. and S.M.B. links. Indirectly, however, Tarbela would also serve the areas North and Northeast of this line inasmuch as it would substitute for Mangla supplies in the areas under its direct command. Because of the interchangeability of surface water supplies during the rabi season throughout most of the canal system Tarbela water would, over time, not be used in any one specified area but would add to the overall availability in the system at times and in places of most stringent scarcities. Measured at Attock the regulating effect of Tarbela would increase the mean Indus flows during the months of November to April initially by about 65 percent. 2. Tarbela Water Availability and Distribution 1.09 In conveying Tarbela water to the watercourses considerable distribution losses would occur. Because Tarbela would serve the system as a whole rather than any specified area these losses have been assumed to be of the same proportion as the general average losses from basin ANWIEX 4.1 Page 4 storage releases as a whole. Applying this assumption the consultant has determined the quantity of Tarbela water ava,ilable at watercourse head in accordance with the following formula. 1, T(WC) = Q(WC) x T(R) Q(RR) Because of the integrated nature of water development and the improvement of water allocations and distribution anticipated in the IACA program, the quantity of Tarbela water available at watercourse head (T(WC)) according to this approach would account for a quantity which would include substi- tution effects of groundwater pumping as well as net savings in surface water deliveries resulting from improved distribution and consequent reduc- tion in losses. This may thus somewhat overstate the proportion of actual Tarbela deliveries to total availability at watercourse head. To the extent, however, that distribution improvements during the rabi season would be dependent on river flow regulation provided by Tarbela this would be representative of the project's indirect benefits in this respect. 1.10 The quantities of stored water delivered to watercourse heads at reference years determined in this way are summarized below for groups of canal commands. Projected Increments of Storage Use of W4atercourse Heads :' River and Reservoir Incremental Water Use During Commands Development CCA Release Period (Mill. acres) 1975 1985 Ultimate - ---- AF)------ Kabul and Swat 0.7 -0.15 -0.44 -0.46 Indus (Tarbela) only 3.3 0.18 0.25 0.31 Indus (Tarbela), Jhelum and/or Chenab: (a) Northern Commands 4.3 0.76 1.44 2.26 (b) Lower Indus Commands 9.0 0.62 2.59 5.62 Jhelum 2.0 -0.19 -0.21 -0.13 Chenab and/or Jhelum 7.6 0.99 0.86 3.44 Chenab only 25 0.46 0.97 1.14 TOTAL 29.4 Net incremental lWater Use at Watercourse heads during Storage Release Period: 2.67 5.46 12.18 V/ For canal command details see Appendix 1, Table 4.1. 1/ Q(WC) - Incremental stored water requirements above historic use. Q(R) - Incremental stored water requirements above replacement requirements (Sutlej and Ravi replacements). T(R) - Tarbela storage available during scarce water period. A1ETEX 4.1 As development proceeds the net incremental water use during the storage release period would exceed the Tarbela capacity. Therefore, the actual Tarbela use was assumed to be either the total net incremental use or the availability from Tarbela at watercourse heads whenever the latter would be less. 1.11 The resulting quantities available from Tarbela at watercourse heads were interpolated for each year over the lifetime of the project. 1/ Below a summary of the releases during the period of rabi water scarcities and of the Tarbela water availabilities at watercourse heads is given for reference years. Tarbela Releases and Watercourse Availabilities during Period of Rabi Scarcities Storage Storage Release Watercourse Release Watercourse Period Releases Deliveries Period Releases Deliveries (MATF) (MAF) (MAF) 1975/76 5.0 1/ 2.67 1990/2000 5.46 3.02 1979/80 7.23 4.16 2004/2005 4.50 2.7h 198h/85 7.06 4.27 2009/2010 3.65 2.23 1989/90 6.65 3.95 2014/2015 2.80 1.71 1/ Quantity assumed to be available for release because of partial im- pounding in preceding high flow period which would still have been affected by construction. These quantities would be made available during the periods of rabi water scarcity and would initially not include the operational reserve maintained for releases in April and May (see para 1.07). The relationship of releases to watercourse deliveries shown above also includes the increasing distribu- tion efficiency with conveyance losses gradually decreasing from about 47 percent to 39 percent. 1.12 Because most of these losses would percolate to the groundwater aquifer IACA has in its water distribution analyse's admitted Tarbela water only in those commands where either sufficient tubewell capacity would be in operation to recover the added recharge or where the water table is at a satisfactory depth and Tarbela losses would not immediately contribute 1/ See Appendix 1, Table 5.4. ANNEX 4.1 Page 6 to further waterlogging. Furthermore, IACA has scheduled Tarbela water deliveries strictly in accordance with its projections in each canal command of intensity growth, crop water requirements, and other sources of supply. In combination these constraints impose an unrealistic limitation on the effective utilization of the reservoir. During the early period of opera- tion this results in an imputed surplus availability at Tarbela which would diminish over time and disappear by 1982. 1.13 A comparison of these imputed surpluses with the watercourse requirements under mean year flow conditions indicates initial surpluses of about three to five percent at watercourse heads. Initial Storage Surplus in Relation to Watercourse Requirements During Scarce Periods Implied Surpluses 2/ Surpluses as lWatercourse At Water- Percent of Water- Year Requirements - At Reservoir course Heads 3/ course Requirements 1976 28.0 3.50 1.5 5.4 1977 28.5 3.25 1.5 5.3 1978 29.1 3.00 1.h 4.8 1979 29.6 2.50 1.2 4.1 1980 30.1 2.00 0.9 3.0 1/ Annex 3.2 to Volume II, Sequential Analysis, System Summaries for respective years for periods November through March. 2/ Approximate as per Figure 13, Volume III of Bank Group's report. 3/ After losses (47%); see para 1.11. sThile substantial increases in watercourse availability during a single season may be difficult to absorb the Bank Group believes that the surpluses of the order shown above would not materialize in reality. Since farmers generalJly over-extend their cropped acreage relative to the available irrigation supplies in the rabi season such marginal surpluses should be readily absorbed together with the total supplies available during the periods of rabi scarcity. 1.14 The losses incurred in the conveyance of Tarbela water from the reservoir site to the crops would be partially re-used. To the extent that they would occur in usable groundwater zones they could be recovered through groundwater pumping. While these quantities cannot be ANNEX 4.1 Page 7 assessed with any precision the consultant has made an arbitrary estimate of the valuable recharge from Tarbela. 1/ These quantities are shown below for reference years. Usable Tarbela Recharge at Reference Years Year Usable Recharge Year Usable Recharge (MiAF) MATF) 1975/76 0.3 1999/2000 1.1 1979/80 0.8 2004/2005 0.9 1984/85 1.4 2009/2010 0.7 1989/90 1.5 2014/2015 0.6 For purposes of project evaluation the value of these recharge quantities would need to be reduced by the extra pumping costs required for their recovery. However, these losses would add to the total annual recharge and would thus contribute to higher utilization of the installed tubewell capacities. Within the principle of balanced recharge pumping this would improve the efficiency of groundwater projects. 3. Cost Estimates and Expenditure Schedule 1.15 Detailed cost estimates for the project are given in the Bank Group's report, Annex 1, Volume III, Program for Development of Surface Water Storage. The costs used for purposes of the economic evaluation are summarized below: 1/ See Appendix 1, The Tarbela Project, page 4.7. ANNEX 4.1 Page 8 Estimated Cost of the Tarbela Project 1/ (US$ million equivalent) Foreign Reservoir W4orks Total Exchange Precontract Costs 2/ 16.5 4.7 Net Contract Costs 414.4 284.0 Contingencies (20%) 86.2 57.7 Engineering and Administration 36.2 30.0 Insurance and Miscellaneous 9.0 9.0 Performance Bond 4.0 4.0 Land Requisition and Resettlement 59.0 625.3 389.4 Power Facilities (Units 1 to 8 Inclusive) Civil Eigineering Works 55.1 35.7 Contingencies (20%) 11.0 7.1 Mechanical and Electrical Equipment 35.6 31.7 Contingencies (10%) 3.6 3.2 105.3 77.7 Engineering and Administration 8.4 7.0 Total units 1 to 8 113.7 84.7 Estimated total project cost including first 8 units 739.0 474.1 1/ Excluding taxes, duties, levies and interest during construction. 2/ Excluding costs incurred prior to January, 1964. Excluding power facilities the capital costs of the dam would thus be US$ 625 million or about Rs. 2,977 million equivalent. 1.16 Following the proposed program of construction these costs would be incurred roughly in accordance iwith the following schedule: ANNEX 4ip Page 9 Tarbela Cost Stream For Purposes of Economic Analysis Year Capital Investment Percent Year Capital Investment Percent (Rs. mill) (Rs. mill) 1965 10.0 0.3 1970 428.h 14.h 1966 65.7 2.2 1971 482.7 16.2 1967 78.1 2.6 1972 433.2 14.6 1968 393.2 13.2 1973 368.h 12.4 1969 436.5 14.7 1974 223.7 7.5 1975 56.6 1.9 Total 2,976.5 100.0 1.17 Because of the long construction period maintenance and opera- tional expenditures would occur during construction. Annual O&M expendi- tures have been estimated by the c6nsultant at about Rs. 10.4 million continuing from 1972 onwards. 4. Project Evaluation 1.18 The evaluation of the Tarbela project as an integral part of a comprehensive water development program covering the entire gravity irrigation system in the Indus Basin poses a number of methodological problems. Tarbela would add not more than about four percent to the total water availability in the system. However, the project would be capable of delivering these quantities at a time of utmost scarcity namely during the winter months when natural river flows are at their lowest and when no rainfalls occur over wide areas of the basin. Because of this regulation effect on gravity flows the water delivered by Tarbela would be of a greatly increased scarcity value. Nevertheless, these quantities of water could alternatively be provided by groundwater pumping if recharge could be induced during the summer months when surplus river flows occur. This in turn would require the increase in canal capacities to convey surface water for induced recharge. In addition, this would require power facilities sufficient to meet greatly increased pump- ing loads during the winter months. 1.19 Aside from other storage possibilities, which are discussed in Volume III of the Bank Group's report, the alternative to Tarbela would thus consist of a program of canal enlargement combined with tubewell fields to rec2ver the recharge and supported by corresponding power facilities. - W4hile theoretically conceivable this alternative contains a number of practical difficulties. It would require canal remodelling on 1/ Another alternative would include groundwater mining. This has been rejected by IACA for reasons of cost and is given in Volume II, Chapter III. ANNEX 4.1 Page 10 a large scale which the consultant feels is not within the scope of the existing implementation capacity. It would furthermore require the adop- tion of irrigation practices by farmers during the summer months under which inducement of recharge of substantial quantities of water could take place. This would not only be difficult to achieve but would also lead to recharge in saline groundwater areas as well as in groundwater areas requiring mixing with surface supplies. In the absence of Tarbela the latter would be limited in the rabi season by the historical flows in the rivers without regulation other than that provided by Mangla. This alter- native would thus restrict rabi development mainly to fresh groundwater areas. In these areas it would require groundwater pumping concentrated in a few months during the rabi season thus creating accentuated peak power demands. 1.20 The alternative described above would appear impractical in the near future and has been excluded from the evaluation of Tarbela. The consultant's evaluation has instead been based on the simulation of a completely integrated water supply system. In the development of this system canal enlargement requirements have been minimized because of practical limitations. Ground- and surface water supplies have been integrated so as to meet water requirements in accordance with the time schedules of assumed cropping patterns from different sources of supplies. The integrated water supply schedule would satisfy crop water requirements on time, provide for mixing, avoid acceleration of waterlogging, and would stay within the generation, transmission, and distribution capacity of the power program. Under this supply schedule Tarbela releases would take place between November and April with nearly 70 percent of its availa- bility released during January, February and liarch, the month of greatest surface water scarcity. 1.21 The Tarbela releases would thus meet deman s in the integrated supply schedule not provided for by other sources. - No other means of meeting this specific demand would exist under the comprehensive water development program since complete integration of all water resources is assumed. The consultant has therefore defined the period of Tarbela irrigation releases as the "Scarce Rabi Water Period". Quantitatively this scarcity has been largely determined within existing canal capacities except for the period after 1985 when canal enlargement would take place on a larger scale. Within any storage release season the "scarce rabi water period" was thus taken to be generally that period of the rabi s ason during which irrigation demandsl- after groundwater supplies - would l/ The integrated supply schedule for the 1985 condition is demonstrated graphically in Figure 1. 2/ Measured at rim stations. 3/ The provision of groundwater would follow a predetermined pumping pattern based on a distribution of the pumping requirements in accordance with other crop needs, peak and average utilization rates of the tubewells, and power availability. ANNEX 4.1 Page 11 exceed the river inflow under mean year flow conditions. 1/ As water requirements increase because of exDansion of rabi intensities and, at a later stage, kharif intensities, the period of scarcity would change as follows: Period of Rabi Scarcity Reservoir Storage Availability Period of Capacity during Scarce Period Scarcityr (MAF) (7TIAF On completion 8.6 7.3 Nov. to lIarch 1985 7.4 7.0 Nov. to April 2000 5.h 5.Li Nov. to HIay The timely limitation of the period of scarcity and therefore Tarbela releases for irrigation does not extend to the operational reserve discussed in para 1.11. For purposes of Tarbela evaluation, however, the consultant has used only the releases during the scarce rabi water period. This is demonstrated in Figure 1 for the 1985 condition. 2/ 1.22 The storage releases during bhe period of scarcity after con- veyance losses and the recovery of such losses would give the total quantities of valuable water provided by Tarbela. These have been deter- mined by the consultant as follows (see paras 1.11 and 1.13 above): W4atercourse Deliveries from Tarbela Storage Releases Used Recoverable Total at Year st Tatercourse Head Recharge WIatercourse Heads …__________________________ …(AF)-------------------------- 1975/76 2.67 0.3 2.97 1979/80 3.80 0.8 h.60 198h/85 h.27 1.h 5.67 1989/90 3.95 1.5 5.45 1999/2000 3.02 1.1 4.12 200L4/2005 2.74 0.9 3.69 2009/2010 2.23 0.7 2.97 2014/2015 1.71 0.6 2.31 1/ Where surface supplies would be integrated with groundwater supplies in project areas the use of mean year flows supplemented by pumping would provide adequate supplies in each month in four years out of five. 2/ System Summary, based on Sequential Analysis. ANNEX 4.1 Page 12 Recharge would be recqvered in accordance with the adopted groundwater pumping schedules and therefore not necessarily during the scarce rabi water period. 1.23 In order to determine the agricultural benefits attributable to the Tarbela project the consultant has distinguished between Tarbela deliveries and recoverable recharge. The value per acre foot of Tarbela deliveries has been determined by dividing total water availability during the period of scarcity (including historic deliveries and groundwater, see Figure 1) into the total value of rabi production in the irrigated parts of the Indus Basin, based on the production projections made for individual canal commands. This approach implies that the irrigation supplies used on rabi crops but not during the period of scarcities, i.e. before and after the period of scarcity, could be considered as a free good. In quanti- tative terms this means that only about 85 percent of the water used during rabi has been related to 100 percent of the rabi production. On this basis the consultant has determined the following values per acre foot and the net benefits attributable to Tarbela deliveries: Net Benefits Attributable to Tarbela before Recharge 1/ Rabi Watercourse Attributable Year Deliveries Value/Acre Foot Net Benefits (MAF) (Rs.) (Rs. mill) 1975/76 2.67 135 360.5 1984/85 4.27 149 631.5 1999/2000 3.02 169 510.4 2014/2015 1.71 174 297.5 1/ For details see Appendix 1, especially table 5.4. 1.24 The above stated values per acre foot represent the average value of water defined as scarce. The assessment of marginal values would have required the simulation of the irrigation system without Tarbela which would have had to be based on substantially different 1/ priorities for canal enlargement and especially groundwater development. - 1/ This is further substantiated in Part II of the Economic Annex to the Bank Group's report: "A Linear Programming Analysis of Irriga- tion Development Potentialities in the Indus Basin". ANNEX, 4.1 Page 13 However, the consultant's evaluationof Tarbela is in accordance with the agreed terms of reference. These required IACA to prepare a cohesive water development program with the availability of main storage by 1974 as a given datum. 1/ Nevertheless, an attempt was made by the Bank Group to determine the effects of postponement of Tarbela in an alterna- tive sequence of development in the linear programming analysis mentioned above. It was found that the proposed sequence of development would result in net savings in terms of present worth (1965 - at eight percent) of about Rs. 226 million including power benefits (see para 1.28) above the next best sequence. 1.25 The recoverable recharge has been valued by the consultant on the basis of the average value per acre foot of water for both seasons. This assumes that recharge would be pumped at any time of the year accord- ing to requirements. For reference years the recharge values determined by the consultant would be as follows: Value of Tarbela Recharge Recoverable Attributable Year Recharge Value/Acre Foot Recharge Benefits ./ (MAF) (Rs.) (Rs. mill) 1975/76 0.3 96 33.3 1984/85 1.4 114 162.8 1999/2000 1.1 152 167.1 2014/15 0.6 159 91.4 1/ Before pumping costs. The above shown recharge values are again based on averages for all canal commands in the Indus Basin. 1.26 For the comprehensive ph'ase of the Indus Special Study the power consultant also re-garded Tarbela as an integral part of the development programf and no separate evaluation of Tarbela power benefits was made. In evalu1ating Tarbela the consultant has, therefore, used the power benefits determ:ihnd in the fiirt phase of the study and given in the Bank Group's repoft on Tarbela, dated February 15, 1965. Though the installations of turbines at Tarbela, and consequent increase in generating 1/ See Chapter 5 of Part II of the Economic Annex. ANNEX 4.1 Page 14 capacity, are now scheduled to proceed more rapidly, the load forecast remains much the same. The consultant has estimated that these changes may increase the power benefits over those assumed in the 1965 report by five to ten percent. Because the irrigation benefits are considerable and dominate the evaluation such an adjustment would have only marginal impact and the consultant has therefore adopted the unadjusted 1965 benefit values for power. These were defined as the net savings of the Tarbela hydro generation over alternative thermal generation. As shown in Appendix 1, page 5.3 the present worth at eight percent of the net benefits of power would be about Rs. 378 million; the flow of the benefits over the lifetime of the project is also shown in this Appendix (Table 5.5). 1.27 In summary the joint benefits of Tarbela according to the con- sultant would thus be about as follows: Present Wnorth as of 1965 at 8% of Tarbela Benefits 1/ Rs. Million Net Present Value of Tarbela Deliveries 2,747 Net Present Value of Recoverable Recharge 645 Power Benefits 378 TOTAL 3,770 1/ See Appendix 1, Chapter 5. The present worth as of 1965 at eight percent of the total costs to the economy including operation and maintenance costs have been estimated by the consultant at Rs. 1,959 million (see Appendix 1, Table 5.6). In the consultant's assessment the B/C ratio of the project would thus be 1.9 and the corresponding rate of return would be about 13.3 percent. 1.28 Similar to the assessment of effects of postponement of Tarbela on agricultural benefits discussed above (para 1.24) an exercise has been carried out by the Bank Group to determine the affects on power of various timings and drawdown levels for Tarbela.2! This analysis confirms that a sequence of power decelopment including postponement of Tarbela would involve higher costs to the economy than the sequence proposed. The analysis also 1/ See the Bank Group's report, Volume IV, Program for the Development of Power, especially Annex 7, Power Aspects of the Tarbela Project. ANNEX 4.l Page 15 indicates that the assumed drawdown level of 1,332 feet for irrigation would be compatible with the envisaged power generation program though there may be some advantages in short term variations around this level. 1.29 In testing the results of the consultant's evaluation the Bank Group has introduced a number of different assumptions. Methodologically the Bank Group proceeded from the point of view that the Tarbela releases would perform an assigned function within an integrated water supply schedule. The scarcity argument becomes irrelevant since the supply schedule is the very instrument through which all scarcities are being met by all available sources within the set of physical constraints operative in the system at any point in -time. Furthermore, under a fully integrated supply schedule supporting a rapidly growing cropping intensity the contributions of the individual sources of supply become increasingly indistinguishable. Though specific functions are assigned to each source of supply this does not exclude the probability that a different function could be performed by the same source. However, in harmonizing agri- cultural, power, technical and operational needs the supply schedule has been optimized to the extent that the integrated supplies support, over a twelve month period, the water requiremnents of an integrated cropping pattern. This consideration led the Bank Group to conclude that Tarbela should be evaluated as a source of water within the total supply schedule rather than as a project satisfying specific scarcities. 1.30 It follows from the above that the value of Tarbela water would be equivalent to the average value of incremental water made available over a cropping cycle in the system as a whole. While the assessment of the latter would again have depended on an alternative water development program the Bank Group felt it could use, as representative of this value, the results of eleven evaluations of projects located in various parts of the basin and covering more than five million acres CCA. 14ost of these projects wTould actually absorb increasing amounts of surface water though not necessarily Tarbela water. These values represent the improvement of agricultural practices and the use of non-water inputs generally assumed to take place in project areas more rapidly than elsewhere. Though inconsequential, inasnuch as not all incremental rabi surface supplies would be used in project areas this would imply a slightly favorable bias. At watercourse heads the weighted average value per acre foot of incremental water used in these areas would increase from about Rs. 37 in 1975 to about Rs. 80 by 1985 and Rs. 118 by the end of the century (see Appendix 2). 1.31 Applying these values to the total Tarbela deliveries at water- course heads and extrapolating to full Tarbela availabilities by neglecting the theoretical surpluses assumed by the consultant (see paras 1.12 and 1.13) the Bank Group derived the following net benefits attributable to the Tarbela deliveries at reference years: ANNEX 4.1 Page 16 Bank Group's Estimate of Net Agricultural Benefits Attributable to Tarbela Before Recharge Rabi Storage Value/Acre Foot Attributable Year Availability at Storage Site 2! Net Benefits (MAF) (Rs.) (Rs. mill) 1975 5.0 20.3 102 1985 7.1 43.6 310 2000 5.0 66.2 331 2015 2.7 89.2 241 1/ The conversion to storage site becarne necessary in order to evaluate total availability at assumed loss factors of 45% rather than partial releases. The above assessment of benefits is based on the extrapolation of weighted average values of incremental water use within project areas to the full utilization of all water availabilities from Tarbela within the system at large. Over the lifetime of the project this would be equivalent to a present worth at eight percent of about Rs. 1,475 million. 1.32 To the above the value of recoverable recharge of about Rs. 187 million net of pumping costs has been added. This value has been based on the recharge quantities determined by the consultant and the average value per unit of incremental water as assessed in the project evaluations. Allow- ance for costs of recovery were assumed to be Rs. 17 per acre foot of re- charge pumped. Associated charges for canal remodelling have been allowed for by deducting the costs as determined by IACA from the aggregate benefits. 1.33 Including power benefits of about Rs. 611 million as assessed by the Bank Group 1/ total attributable benefits of Tarbela, discounted at eight percent to 1965, have thus been estimated by the Bank Group at Rs. 2,241 million. This compares to a present worth of total costs at eight percent including O&M expenditures of Rs. l,885 million. J The Benefit- Cost ratio at eight percent would thus be about 1.2. The corresponding rate of return of the project would be 9.2 percent. (Details of the analysis are given in Appendix 3, page 5). 1/ For the purpose of this analysis power benefits have been assessed as the cost differential between a power program based on Tarbela in 1975 and the next best program including Kunhar by 1981. See Bank Group's report, Volume IV, Program for the Development of Power; especially Annex 7. 2/ IACA's present worth of costs of Rs. 1,959 million is based on the dis- counting of the cost stream to a mid-year point. The above analysis is based on discounting to the beginning of the year. ANNEX 4.1 Page 17 1.34 The above results of the consultant's and the Bank Group's analyses may be considered as the range within which the Tarbela benefits are likely to fall. Further tests carried out by the Bank Group indicate this as shown below: Results of Tarbela Evaluation Under Varying Assumptions 1965 Consultant's Bank - Bank Group Consultant's Evaluation Group Evaluation Evaluation MIodified Evaluation I II Net Present Worth of Benefits at 8% (Rs. million) 3.537 3,770 3,353 1,994 2,241 Power Benefits as % of Total 18.3% 10.0% 10.7% 18.3% 27.3% Benefit/Cost Ratio (at 8%) 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.1 1.2 Rate of Return 13.3% 13.3% 12.5% 8.4% 9.2% 1/ In the Bank Group's evaluation Analysis I is based on the use of IACA's estimate of power benefits while Analysis II includes the power benefits assessed by the Bank Group (see para 1.33). The Bank Group's 1965 evaluation was based on incremental water use in specific "Priority Areas". The details are set out in the Bank Group's report on Tarbela, dated February 15, 1965. The consultant's evaluation has been discussed above and the details are set forth in Appendix 1, especially Chapter 5. In the modified evaluation total rabi supplies (rather than "scarce" supplies, see para 1.23) have been related to total rabi production. The calculations for all evaluations are given in Appendix 3. 1.35 In this evaluation alternative sequences of storage development on the Indus have not been considered. Instead, this evaluation was to assess the beneficial effects of a given quantity of storage and regulation irrespective of its particular site as long as the latter would not impair the required command capabilities. The assessment of the best sequences of storage facilities-is- however, further discussed in Volume III of the Bank Group's report. Furthermore, Annexure C of Annex 1 to this report contains an analysis of five alternative sequences of storage development carried out by the consultant. The analysis consists essentially of a comparison of total costs as well as costs per unit of water made avail- able of feasible sequences of storage works, that is of sequences which would provide roughly equivalent amounts of water at the same time points as the proposed program. While one of the alternatives would appear com- petitive with the program proposed the analysis shows that there would be no definite cost advantage and that the most favorable alternative would be less well prepared and investigated and therefore less firm in its aggregate estimates. Since the timing of Tarbela of around 1975 is vital to the water development program as a whole the fact that it is ready for immediate implementation while little is known of some of the component parts of the second best sequence gives the project under consideration a decided advantage. 5. Conclusions 1.36 The results stated above can only be indicative of the range of benefits the Tarbela project is likely to produce. Because of the complex technical interdependencies of the various water development acti- vities of which this project forms part and the resulting joint benefit and cost occurrences it is difficult to establish more than a well-founded representative evaluation. 1.37 The economic efficiency of the Tarbela project has of necessity to be seen in terms of its functional contribution within an integrated system which is about to undergo radical change. Following the implementa- tion of the Indus Treaty Works the traditional natural flow-diversion system will in the next phase be converted into a system based on river regulation and the integration of surface and groundwater. Storage of the quantity and at the time as would be provided by Tarbela forms a vital part of this process. In the course of this transformation the value of surface water storage would be enhanced by the presence of tubewell fields and conversely the provision of main-stein storage greatly improves the efficiency of tubewell development. The simultaneous development of the two sources of irrigation supplies not only leads to a greater flexibility in the operation of the system but also to a mutually enhanced efficiency in reservoir and tubewell utilization. 1.38 In view of the need to develop a balanced supply of irrigation water which meets the projected system needs and reduces the risks involved in the exclusive development of groundwater, the Bank Group is satisfied that main-stem storage of around eight I}AF is required by about 1975. On the basis of its analyses the Bank Group concludes that the Tarbela project as planned would meet this requirement at reasonable costs and with greater certainty than other feasible alternatives. The project would make a sub- stantial contribution to-the growth of agricultural production in West ANNEX 4.1 Page 19 Pakistan as well as towards meeting future power needs. To the extent that the functional contributions of this project are measurable the Banlc Group is satisfied that the range of computed returns from 9.2 percent to 13.3 percent represents a fair assessment of the benefits and the economic justification of the project. ANNEX 4.1 Appendix 1 PROGRAMME FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF IRRIGATION AND AGRICULTURE IN WEST PAKISTAN T H E T A R B E L A P R O J E C T Evaluation of the Tarbela Project Within The Development Programme of the Indus Basin Sir Alexander Gibb & Partners London November 1966 THE TARBELA PROJECT Evaluation of the Tarbela Project within the Development Programme of the Indus Basin CONTENTS Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Previous Studies 1.2 Present Study Chapter 2 PURPOSES OF PROJECT 2.1 The Approach to Basin Development 2.2 Irrigation Development Programme 2.3 Mangla, Chasma and Tarbela Storage Capacity 2.4 Surface Storage Requirements 2.5 The Function of Tarbela 2.6 Interdependence of the Project in the Development Plan of West Pakistan Chapter 3 DESCRIPTION OF DAM AND ASSOCIATED WORKS 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Geology 3.3 Status of Investigations and Designs 3.4 Embankments 3.5 Spillways 3.6 Outlet Works 3.7 Power Installation 3.8 Hydrology 3.9 Sedimentation of Reservoir 3.10 Programme for Construction 3.11 Cost Estimates Chapter 4 THE USE AND BENEFITS OF TARBELA WATER 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Irrigation Development with Tarbela 4.3 Agricultural Development with Tarbela 4.4 Power Programme with Tarbela Chapter 5 EVALUATION OF THE PROJECT 5.1 NPV for Tarbela 5.2 Power Benefits 5.3 Costs of Tarbela 5.4 Internal Rate of Return Chapter 6 CONCLUSIONS Appendices A Project Statistics B Irrigation System Distribution Zones C Alternative Sequences in Reservoir Construction C.1 Programme Adopted by Bank Consultants C.2 Alternative Programmes for Surface Storage C.3 Useful Storage of the Reservoirs C.4 Costs of Stored Water C.5 Evaluation of Alternatives References TABLES Table Number Title 1.1 Tarbela and Gariala Projects: Present Worth of Benefits and Costs 2.1 Projected Requirements for Stored Water in the Indus Basin 3.1 Ratio of 10 day flows at Darband to 10 day flows at Attock 3.2 Average monthly inflow at Darband 1868-1964 3.3 Live Storage Depletion 3.4 Tarbela Dam Cost Estimate for Economic Analysis 3.5 Tarbela Dam - Estimated Contract Costs for Economic Analysis 4.1 Projected Increments of Storage Use at Watercourse and Usable Recharge from Storage, in Canal Command Groups 4.2 Average Intensities of the Regions of the Indus Plains 4.3 Cropping Patterns of Agricultural Regions 4.4 Present Average Yields of Main Crops 4.5 Present Total Production by Crops 4.6 Present Gross Production Value of Crops by Region 4.7 Present Milk and Meat Production for Human Consumption 4.8 Present Gross Production Value for Animal Husbandry 4.9 Present Total Regional Gross Production Value for Agricult.ure 4.10 Present and Future Farm Prices 4.11 Projected Basic Cropping Pattern for the year 2000 4.12 Cropping Intensities of Regions 4.13 Incremental Cropped Acreage of Main Crops 4.14 Production and Incremental Production in Indus Plains 4.15 Gross Production Value for Crops 4.16 Milk and Meat Production for Human Consumption 4.17 Gross Production Values for Animal Husbandry 4.18 Comparison of Power and Energy Load Projections in 1964 and 1966 Reports 4.19 Installation of Hydro-electric Units 4.20 Tarbela Generating Capabilities 4.21 Requirements for Thermal Capacity 5.1 Benefits from Tarbela 5.2 Costs of Tarbela and costs per acre foot of Stored Water 5.3 Present Worth (1965) of Tarbela Benefits and Costs 5.4 NPV for Tarbela Surface & Recharge Supplies, Associated Costs and Present Worth Agricultural NPV 5.5 Tarbela Power Aspects 5.6 Costs of Tarbela Dam 5.7 Present Worth 1965, Agricultural NPV, Power Benefits and Costs of Tarbela at 8, 12 and 15 percent C.1 Requirements for Stored Water with Mean River Flows C.2 Adopted Programme for Surface Storage C.3 Alternative Programmes for Surface Storage C.4 Economic Costs of Projects C.5 Net Cost of Stored Water C.6 Discounted Costs of Stored Water II FIGURES Figure Number 1 Indus Basin Canal Commands in West Pakistan 2 Proposed Basin Water Resources Development Programme 3 Tarbela Dam Site Location Plan 4 Tarbela Dam Project: Reservoir Map 5 Tarbela Dam Project: Plan and Sections 6 Flow Duration Curves, Attock and Darband 7 Sediment Rating Curve of Indus River near Darband 8 Tarbela Dam Project: Pattern of Sediment Disposition 9 River and Link Canal Distribution System 10 Canal System and Canal Commands 11 Basic Yield Projections of Irrigated Crops 12 Indus and Jhelum Rivers Combined Storage Programme 13 Storage Programme Adopted 14 Storage Programme - Alternative 1 15 Storage Programme - Alternative 2 16 Storage Programme - Alternative 3 17 Storage Programme - Alternative 2A 18 Storage Programme - Alternative 3A 19 Requirements for Regulation on Indus cum Kabul Note: Figures are bound with text at the end of the report. CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 PREVIOUS STUDIES This evaluation is based on the Bank Consultants' reports giving the results of a study whose ultimate objective was to prepare a programme for the development of irrigation, agriculture, power and surface water storage in West Pakistan. The first objective of the study was to complete, early in 1965, reports covering the use and benefits of water stored at Tarbela or selected alternative sites on the River Indus. The results of the Tarbela Reports (Ref.l, 2 and 3) were reviewed and consolidated by a group of the Bank Staff headed by Dr. P. Lieftinck (Ref.4.). In order to maintain the growth in agriculture that would be expected with the use of stored water, it was necessary to establish that the rapid depletion of reservoir content by siltation that occurs on the Indus could be made good at a later stage of development at an economic cost. Tarbela was therefore associated with an off-stream storage site at Gariala to which diversion of Indus flows was possible by means of a gravity fed canal. A similar provision was made at Kalabagh, an alternative site to Tarbela, by associating it with a pumped storage scheme at Dhok Pathan, but in the event the Tarbela/Gariala sequence was found to be more favourable than Kalabagh/Dhok Pathan. Tarbela alone was also evaluated in order to establish that its benefits were not unduly dependent on its association with Gariala, for which more suitable alternatives might be found at a later stage of the study. Owing to the fact that time did not permit a basin wide study of storage requirements, certain assumptions had to be made as to the use for irrigation of stored water. In agreement with the Government of Pakistan, therefore, certain limited priority areas were selected; the development of these areas was studied and benefits determined by projecting their future productivity and costs over the life-time of the reservoirs (a) with and (b) without stored water. The difference in the net value of production was taken to be the irrigation and agricultural benefits from the quantity of stored water used. Full use could only be found in the priority areas for about 4.2MAF of stored water annually, and certain assumptions were made as to the benefits obtainable from the storage available in excess of this figure. 1.1 Power benefits were assessed as the difference between the cost of a power programme including the projedt and a power programme in which the power element of the project was replaced by thermal generation. The following table summarises the present worth benefits and costs of the Tarbela/Gariala sequence and of Tarbela alone, which were presented in the Bank's report (Ref.4.). TABLE 1.1 Tarbela and Gariala Projects: Present Worth of Benefits and costs U.S. $ million equivalent, discounted at 8% to) (U.S. $ million January 1, 1965. ) TARBELA/GARIALA(1) TARBELA ALONE (2) A (3) B (4) C (5) B (4) C (5) Benefits Net power bene- fits 81.2 81.2 81.2 81.2 81.2 Irrigation bene- fits 1116.4 1002.8 863.7 701.6 598.5 Total 1197.6 1084.0 944.9 782.8 679.7 Costs Storage costs 603.0 603.0 603.0 467.4 467.4 Additional tube- well pumping costs 24.0 24.0 24.0 15.7 15.7 Total 627.0 627.0 627.0 483.1 483.1 Net Present worth 570.6 457.0 317.9 299.7 196.6 (1) Total storage varies from 8.6 MAF in 1974 to 6.6 MAF in 1988, then on the introduction of Gariala from 11.0 MAF in 1989 to 8.6 MAF in 2027. (2) Total storage varies from 8.6 MAF in 1974 to 1.0 MAF in 2027. 1.2 (1) In variant A, 6.6 MAF in 1974-1988 and 8.6 MAF in 1989-2027 are valued assuming benefits obtained with moderate agricultural input levels, any excess with low agricultu,ral input levels. (4) In variant B, moderate agricultural input levels are assumed for up to 4.2 MAF in 1974-2027, any excess with low agricultural input levels. (5) In variant C, all water is valued with low agricultural input levels. The rate of return on Tarbela/Gariala was shown'to be of the order of 121 percent assuming variant A, and it is evident from the above table that Tarbela alone is not dependent on its association with Gariala to show a satisfactory benefit at a discount rate of 8 percent. Following tht; findings of the Bank Report it was decided in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding of November 1961, to assume for the main part of the Basin-wide study that Tarbela dam would be completed by 1974. Reports on the main study, covering the irrigation and agriculture, power and surface water storage aspects \have now been completed (Ref.5,6 and 7). In addition a sequential study of water use has been undertaken (Ref.8), which has provided useful additional information. The consultants appointed by WAPDA for the Tarbela Dam project are Tippetts Abbett McCarthy Stratton of New York (TAMS). They have been responsible for the site investigations and for the present designs and plans from which we have drawn either directly or through Chas. T. Main (Ref.7.) the information and data given in Chapter 3 and Appendix A. 1.2 PRESENT STUDY The purpose of this report is to bring up to date the previous evaluation -of Tarbela in the context of the long term programme for the development of the Indus Basin provided by the main study. The chief poi-nts of difference in approach between this and the previous evaluation are:- (i) The growth of storage requirement has now been determined for the Basin as a whole and water distribution analyses have been carried out for the--va:ikous stages of future agricultural devel4opment. It is thus possible to define more clearly the part to be played by Tarbela as a major element in the Basin Plan, and the canal commands benefitting from the introduction of water stored at Tarbela have now been identified. 1.3 (ii) As the development programme derived from the main study assumes the completion of Tarbela by 1974 the benefits from agriculture are determined from a consideration of the contribution Tarbela makes as a component part of the development programme in terms of water and hence crop values. Power benefits, it will be seen, are small in comparison with those from agriculture. (iii) The dam site studies have shown that off-stream storage at Gariala will probably be introduced at a later stage of basin development than previously assumed, and that Sehwan-Manbhar, raised Mangla, Chotiari and Kalabagh may be constructed next in sequence before Gariala, Tarbela has therefore been evaluated alone and not in association with Gariala, but recognising that in practice replacement water for that lost by sedimentation of the reservoir will be made available. In addition to an evaluation of the benefits of Tarbela this report sets out the purposes of the project within the context of the proposed programme for basin development, and gives a brief description of the project itself. In Appendix C various alternative sequences of reservoir construction are reviewed. 1.4 CHAPTER 2 PURPOSES OF PROJECT 2.1 THE APPROACH TO BASIN DEVELOPMENT There is clear evidence that the present amounts of irrigation water applied to crops in the Indus Basin are too low and represent a constraint on production both in terms of crop yields and of further expansion of cropped acreage. While under present conditions underwatering often gives greater production than with more concentrated water applications, this will not be true in the future when the wider use of fertilizers and improved crop varieties must be coupled with optimum crop watering. Increased water supplies to improve field applications and to expand cropped acreage are therefore a prerequisite to any major advance in agricultural production quite apart from the benefits than can be derived from other inputs. The supply of irrigation water in the Indus Basin can be increased in three ways. (i) By the development of the usable groundwater that underlies a large proportion of the area. (ii) By enlarging individual canal capacities to permit greater diversion of kharif river flows. (iii) By surface storage schemes which will store surplus kharif water that otherwise flows to the sea. In their approach to Basin development criteria IACA believe that development should be stimulated within the limits set by a number of specific constraints in each of these spheres. All means of development should therefore be exploited to the full and the problem of programming becomes therefore one of making optimal use of a number of scarce resources rather than a choice of sub- stitution between the various means of development. Surface water should be developed along with groundwater and indeed with other agricultural inputs and it is right to fulfil the need of the programme for surface storage rather than seek substitution by urgent expansion of say the tubewell programme, which IACA have already proposed should be developed over the next decade at the maximum rate that is considered feasible in Pakistan. 2.2 IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME Development priorities in the canal commanded areas of the Indus Basin (see Figure 1) were established taking into account the combined aspects of agriculture, water supply and economics. The resulting phased developments within the irrigation system are included in the proposed programme of groundwater, sub-surface 2.1 drainage and canal development for the main canal commands of the Basin, and this programme, together with the proposed surface drainage and reservoir storage works, is illustrated in Figure 2. The development programme follows a fairly definite pattern over the next three or four decades. The main features during the first decade to 1975 are the large storage reservoirs at Mangla and Tarbela, the IBP link canals and barrages and the installation of public tubewell projects to provide new irrigation supplies and simultaneously to control the watertable, especially in areas where it is unduly high. In groundwater development emphasis would generally be placed on fresh groundwater zones before mixing zones in which dilution of groundwater with surface supplies will be required. IACA have concluded that it is within the capability of West Pakistan to install public tubewells in 30 percent of the good quality groundwater zones by 1970 and 60 percent by 1975. In the period up to 1975 there would moreover be a large advance in private tubewell development in those areas not included in public tubewell projects. It is therefore foreseen that the development of good quality groundwater resources up to the extraction of annual recharge will be entering its final phase about the mid 1970's. The main surface drainage works to be undertaken in the first decade are in the Bari Doab in the north and on the left bank of the Lower Indus region. In the next decade from 1975 to 1985, the public tubewell fields would be extended to cover most of the remaining usable groundwater areas. The improved irrigation supplies from storage and the control of the water-table in usable groundwater zones would enable the programme of canal enlargement to be intensified, based on the experience in the limited projects of the first decade. In the Lower Indus region the programme will be assisted by a new feeder canal and associated storage reservoir at Sehwan/ Manchar, to be completed between 1980 and 1985. Provision of additional link capacity in the Punjab would also be undertaken at about this time, and would enable enlargement of the canals to be put in hand in the central areas of Chaj, Rechna and Bari doabs and on the left bank of the Sutlej. Associated with this canal enlargement, subsurface drainage of saline groundwater areas would be carried out. In areas with high watertable the drainage would precede canal enlargement in order to control the watertable before bringing in increased supplies, and both tubewells and tile drains would be used. The major surface drainage works to be carried out in the second decade are the completion of the Lower Indus left bank outfall and the commencement of the right bank outfall in the Gudu and Sukkur right bank commands. 2.2 In the period from 1985 until after the turn of the century, canal enlargement would be the dominant feature of the programme, accompanied by drainage, and further surface water storage projects. This programme assumes that Mangla Dam on the Jhelum river will be completed in 1967, and that the storage provided by it will offset the loss of flows from the Ravi and Sutlej rivers when they are diverted in India from March 1970 onwards, as provided for in the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960. It also assumes that a small storage pond will be provided at Chasma barrage by 1971 and that the Tarbela Dam will be constructed on the Indus and brought into operation in 1974. 2.3 MANGLA, CHASMA AND TARBELA STORAGE CAPACITY (a) Mangla. The amount of storage provided by Mangla depends on the lowest drawdown level to which the reservoir is operated and, over time, on the degree of siltation. Before our various studies had been completed it was agreed that the reservoir should be operated to the El. 1075' drawdown level, leaving a small quantity of water between this and the minimum operating level of El. 1040' in order to maintain greater power output in the critical period when the reservoir would provide least head on the turbines. At a later stage in our work it became clear that the demand for surface water in the pre-Tarbela period was likely to prove a predominant factor and the need to release the full reservoir content down to El. 1040' would have priority over power. When Tarbela comes into service, surface water shortages at canal heads will be overcome and in the early years supplies will be sufficient to justify the higher operating level for Mangla of about El. 1075'. This situation would obtain until such time as agricultural development, stimulated by the construction of Tarbela, results in a surface water demand exceeding on average the available capacity of Tarbela. We set ou-t below the live storage capacity of Mangla for the two dr:awdown levels referred to above as it will be in 1975-after-due allowance for siltation. Drawdown Mang-la. Main Jari Arm Total Live Level= Reservoir below Mirpur Storage Saddle (MAF) El.lo40' 4.78 0.28 5.o6 E1.1075' 4.35 0.28 4.63 The siltation rate at this time is taken as 0.02 MAF per year. 2.3 These figures are based on a normal maximum retention level of E1.1202' and the amount shown for the Jari Arm is the quantity that can be passed through the Jari outlet (slightly less than the gross content of the arm). (b) Chasma. The Chasma barrage is to be built to a height 4 ft. greater than is necessary for the performance of its normal function as the control structure diverting water from the Indus to the Jhelum via the Chasma-Jhelum link canal. In consequence a small element of storage, amounting to 0.33 MAF, will be retained at the end of the flood season. While sedimentation is not expected to reduce this quantity, seepage losses and evaporation will reduce it by about 14 percent to a usable volume of 0.29 MAF. In 1971, when this storage becomes available, beneficial use can be made of it, but after Tarbela comes into operation in 1975 the function of the Chasma storage element will be almost completely superseded by the large upstream reservoir. Chasma releases early in rabi would merely permit the deferred release of an equivalent quantity of water from Tarbela later in the year, but since Tarbela would contain surplus to mean year requirements such water would have value only in years of low flow. In the evaluation of Chasma raising made by Chas. T. Main, IACA and Sir Alexander Gibb & Partners in October, 1965, (Ref.10), a low value was given to Chasma storage for the first decade after the introduction of Tarbela. As explained in Section 2.4, the estimation of storage requirements for the basin as a whole involves a number of uncertainties, with the result that certain approxi- mations have had to be made; the element of usable storage at Chasma is of the same order as these approxi- mations, and in view of the fact that a low value has been assigned to it after the introduction of Tarbela, it ha' been ignored for the purpose of this evaluation. (c) Tarbela. For the main study the construction of Tarbela Dam was assumed to be completed in time to serve the crops in the rabi season 1974/5. It now seems nolorger feasible to complete the construction in time to permit full impounding of water (8.6 MAF) by that date, but in order to retain 2.4 the full validity of IACA's projections we have assumed for this report that sufficient water will by then be impounded to meet the computed storage requirement of 5 MAF (measured at the reservoir) for that year. In subsequent years the quantity of stored water available at Tarbela to meet irrigation demands will be affected by siltation. The live storage capacity of the reservoir will be depleted at an estimated rate of 0.12 MAF per year during the first 20 years of operation and at 0.17 MAF per year thereafter. The projected live storage capacity of the reservoir would therefore be as follows :- Reference Tarbela live storage Year capacity MAF On completion (1975) 8.6 1985 7.4 2000 5.135 2.4 SURFACE STORAGE REQUIREMENTS The requirements for reservoir storage to meet the irri- gation development programme proposed by IACA for the whole of the Indus Basin were calculated for the reference years 1975, 1985, and 2000. This was undertaken by computer analyses firstly within each canal command at its projected state of development and secondly for the whole complex of link canals and river channels in the Basin. These projected storage requirements, as set out in IACA's report, are summarised below for mean river flow conditions in the reference years 1975, 1985 and 2000 and for two lower flow conditions in the years 1975 and 1985. The lower and upper limits of storage projected for the year 2000 are related to the amount of canal enlarge- ment and hence to the amount of aquifer storage in the fresh groundwater zones at that time. The River Jhelum storage requirements are the aggregate needs for canals which must be supplied by the Jhelum and Chenab rivers, and which cannot be supplied directly from the Indus river through the C - J Link- that is, all Punjab commands located above the T-S-M-B Link. The River Indus storage requirement is the residual basin requirement after allowance has been made for the River Jhelum requirements as stated, and in 1975 relates to the requirement at Tarbela. 2.5 TABLE 2.1 Projected Requirements for Stored Water in the Indus Basin MAF (a) With mean river flows:- 1975 1985 2000 2000 Lower Limit Upper Limit R. Jhelum 4.3 4.5 6.o 7.5 R. Indus 5.0 8.8 15.5 19.0 (b) To meet water demand 1 year out of 2:- R. Jhelum 5.4 5.6 R. Indus 5.7 9.7 (c) To meet water demand 3 years out of 4:- R. Jhelum 6.0 6.2 R. Indus 6.9 12.1 The storage requirements stated above for the Jhelum include the replacement needed for the Sutlej and Ravi flows. The amount of such replacement cannot be quantified with any accuracy, but we estimate that it approaches 5 MAF during the reservoir release period. As stated in Section 2.3 Mangla will have a capacity of between 4.35 MAF and 5.06 MAF in 1975 depending on the drawdown level to which it is operated and on the use of the Jari arm outlet, and it is therefore clear that all this amount of water should be hypothecated to the Punjab canal commands upstream of the T-S-M-B link. In any case the operating instructions for Mangla reservoir should be so drafted to give clear priority to the purpose for which it is constructed namely to replace Sutlej and Ravi flows as and when these become fully used by India. IACA's analyses show that apart from the supplies that will be available from Mangla some 5 MAF or slightly more (5.7 for the 1 year in 2 condition) of storage should be provided on the main Indus stem by 1975, and the need will increase to about 9 MAF by 1985. In practice larger releases will be made if the desired increase in farming intensity is to be stimulated in successive years; in the early years of Tarbela (1976 onwards) this will in effect be achieved by releasing the whole of the available live storage discussed in Section 2.3. In establishing these storage requirements certain approxi- mations have of necessity been made and small quantities have been neglected on both sides of the water balance sheet. For this reason IACA did not include in their calculations the small element of storage in Chasma; the storage that exists at other barrage sites; discharges from the right bank torrents or those of drainage effluent. 2.6 In the IACA projections the need for stored water stems mainly from the proposed increases in rabi crop production which are designed inter alia to approach a state of self sufficiency in cereals for West Pakistan. A much smaller part of the need for stored water is to meet some early and late summer deficiencies. Although the surface storage is a relatively expensive mode of water development, IACA have taken the view that provided a project is in itself viable surface storage should be developed in conjunction with other methods of irrigation supply. This approach is justified for three reasons. Firstly, there is a need to regulate the natural river flows in the rabi season. Secondly, surface water conservation is an integral part of the development plan. While fresh groundwater areas can be developed to a high intensity with the use of groundwater alone, in more saline groundwater areas new surface water imports are essential to maintain adequate dilution of groundwater. Thirdly, since as previously indicated individual constraints are considered to apply to other forms of development, surface storage should be stimulated as much as required to increase agricultural production. It remains to decide upon the best manner, timing and location in which reservoir storage should be provided. 2.5 THE FUNCTION OF TARBELA The future diversion of the flows of the eastern tributaries of the former Punjab for Indian use, under the Indus Water Treaty, adds to what has always been a major engineering problem in the region namely that the greater part of the usable land lies on the eastern side of the Indus plains whereas the greater part of the surface water is to the west. Thus major works are now under construction to convey more water from west to east and to sub- stitute for loss of scarce water supplies by the construction of Mangla Dam on the Jhelum. All these works are however essentially designed to do no more than preserve the status quo, but in so doing they will have the effect of absorbing most of the limited amount of water in the two tributaries remaining available to Pakistan, the Jhelum (23 MAF average annual flow) and the Chenab (26 MAF). For further large scale development of surface supplies it is necessary to turn to the Indus itself with its average annual flow of 93 MAF. The chief characteristic of the Indus is a very high seasonal variation of flow. Approximately 67 MAF or 72 percent of the total occurs in the four months from June to September. The principal scope for future development of surface storage lies in the conservation of this kharif flood, a large part of which at present flows to the sea. There are however some remaining unconserved surpluses on the Jhelum and Chenab rivers which can be developed by raising Mangla Dam but such a measure is only a partial substitute for main stem storage. As will 2.7 be discussed in Appendix C to this report, the raising of Mangla Dam has the merit that it provides cheaper storage than Tarbela but against that there is only a marginal case for further control on the Jhelum whereas the control of the Indus with its large resources has not yet been attempted. The Tarbela dam project offers the most favourable opportunities for meeting the objectives set out in the IACA programme of development and this is supported by our review of alternative sequences for reservoir construction given in Appendix C. The construction of the Tarbela Dam with an initial live storage capacity of 8.6 MAF will be the first stage in the regulation of the Indus river. It will enable irrigation supplies to be matched to the water requirements of the crops instead of depending on the natural flows from the river. It will also provide a substantial increment in rabi surface supplies. Full absorption of this quantity of water, equivalent to a 65 percent increase in the flows of the Indus from mid-October to mid-April will pose a very considerable problem, as it would at whatever point of time it was commissioned. The manner in which the water will be used is considered in Chapter 4. 2.6 INTERDEPENDENCE OF THE PROJECT IN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF WEST PAKISTAN The IACA Development Plan has been formulated on the assumption that the Tarbela Reservoir will come into operation in 1974. The implications on the programme of a reservoir of this size at a predetermined point of time are : (i) The programme is based on the need to provide subsurface drainage in usable groundwater areas with high watertable, in preparation for additional surface water to be supplied from storage. Without this provision waterlogging would result in many areas. (ii) The design of tubewell projects, particularly the capacity of pumps, is influenced by the assumption that only a limited amount of overpumping will be required, as extra surface supplies will be available. (iii) The feasibility of the programme for canal enlargement depends on additional supplies from storage in early and late kharif for kharif crops, and additional rabi supplies for saline and mixing zones. (iv) The choice of priority for tubewell projects has been made with the presence of Tarbela in mind. Conse- quently areas where permanent substitution of surface supplies by groundwater is possible (i.e. perennial areas) have not been given special preference. 2.8 (v) The growth of agricultural intensities is phased to conform to the extra water supplies available and receives a sharp boost when the reservoir comes into operation. (vi) The value of surface water storage is enhanced by the presence of the large tubewell fields included in the IACA programme and furthermore the value of tubewell schemes will be improved by the provision of main stem storage, not only because the development of these two sources of supply leads to greater flexibility of the system, but also through the medium of incremental ground- water recharge, both tubewell fields and reservoirs operate to greater efficiency. This leads to a consideration of the effect of deferring Tarbela on the programme of development for West Pakistan. Firstly the programme of development established by IACA would have to be reconsidered. While it might not entail severe changes, the priority for tubewell development and the capacity of tubewell fields would need re-appraisal. Greater emphasis for tubewell development would for example be placed on existing perennial areas than on the non-perennial areas and special attention would be given to those areas where the opportunity for groundwater mining is favourable. Secondly high priority would need to be attached to canal enlargement in an attempt to achieve a faster rate than projected by IACA. Thirdly the development of the lower Indus, which is largely dependant on Indus main stem storage for additional surface supplies, would be affected. Fourthly the rate of growth of agricultural intensities in the Basin would be slower. In this respect the psychological effect of uncertainty of supplies is likely to be more damaging than the actual shortages. It is however not possible to estimate the extent of the reduction in agricultural production attributable to a deferment of Tarbela since it would partly be offset by overpumping in tubewell projects and partly by the continuance of underwatering. 2.9 CHAPTER 3 DESCRIPTION OF DAM AND ASSOCIATED WORKS 3.1 INTRODUCTION The Tarbela dam site was selected by WAPDA as a result of detailed studies of three potential sites in a 15 mile stretch of the river that commenced in 1955. Present investigations and designs are being carried out fvor WAPDA by Tippetts Abbett McCarthy Stratton of New York (TAMS). The location of the site is shown on Figure 3; the extent of the reservoir and its capacity and area curves are shown on Figure 4; Figure 5 shows a plan and sections of the dam and associated works. The Tarbela project comprises essentially a major embankment dam rising 485 feet above river bed level with a crest length of about 9,000 feet and an impervious blanket extending some 5,000 feet upstream; two auxiliary embankment dams; two chute spillways; four outlet tunnels each of 45 feet maximum diameter and a power station with initially four generating units of 175 megawatts and subsequent extensions for eight more machines. Further details of these structures are given in Appendix A. It should be noted that there are minor differences between the statistics of the project used in this chapter and Appendix A and those given in Chas T. Main's report (Ref.7.). This is because more up to date information has since been made available by TAMS. 5.2 GEOLOGY Tarbela dam site is situated at the downstream end of the Indus River gorge and immediately above the junction between the main Indus valley and the Vale of Peshawar. The Indus River at this point occupies a broad flood-plain some 6,000 feet wide, above which the valley sides rise steeply. The foundations of the various structures present a variety of conditions which call for a range of foundation treatments. Foundation materials vary from hard rock to completely decomposed rock and alluvial deposits. The rocks of the dam site are predominantly low grade metamorphic and intrusive material, and, although thought to be from the same formation, the beds on the two sides of the river differ in some respects. Those on the right bank are more strongly metamorphosed than on the left bank, and differences are observed in rock types. On the right bank the principal rock types are schists, limestones, and basic intrusives with minor beds of quartzite and gypsum. On the left bank they are predominantly metamorphosed thinly bedded marly limestones and slatey mudstones. Considerable jointing and minor faulting has occurred. The geological structure is complicated, with folding in two directions together with local doming. An important feature of this dam site is the presence of deep pervious alluvial filling across the river flood plain. The depth to bed rock ranges generally from 200 to 40Oft. The maximum measured at one location is nearly 600 feet. The bed rock below the alluvium has a very irregular profile and is thought to contain an inactive fault along the right side of the valley. The alluvium is predominantly boulder-gravel with elongated stones set in a sand filling. The dam site is in a zone with occasional seismic activity for which due allowance is made in the design of both the main embankment dam and its auxiliary structures. 3.3 STATUS OF INVESTIGATION AND DESIGN Extensive exploration of the foundations and invest- igation of the available construction materials have already been carried out and further investigations continue. Drilling is underway in the alluvial foundation for the main embankment to obtain further information regarding its structure, composition, and permeability. Immediately after the main contract has been let deep bores will be taken to confirm more accurately the bed rock profile. The foundations for the spillway flip buckets are being explored by means of tunnels and shafts. Exploratory work is continuing in the tunnel area, particularly in the vicinity of the intakes and also of the powerhouse foundations where a gypsiferous deposit may be a potential hazard to concrete structures. 3.2 Hydraulic model tests have been made and are continuing. Natural and distorted scale models of the Indus River in the vicinity of the Tarbela dam site, and of the spillways and outlet works stilling basins, have been built and are being tested at the Irrigation Research Station at Nandipur, West Pakistan. Model tests of the performance of the tunnels, both under diversion and normal operating conditions and during filling of the reservoir and tunnel closure, have been conducted at the Colorado State University Hydraulic Laboratory near Fort Collins, Colorado. Further tests will be necessary to verify certain aspects and their performance for the purpose of the final designs. The consultants (TAMS) for the Water and Power Development Authority of West Pakistan are now in the process of preparing final designs and the main contract documents for the project. 3.4 EMBANKMENTS The main dam with a total volume of fill amounting to 159 million cubic yards (including 20 million in the blanket) will be the most massive of its kind in the world. Seepage through the foundation of the main dam will be controlled by an impervious earth blanket covering the valley floor under the dam and extending about 5,000 feet upstream and by a system of drainage wells in the alluvium at the down- stream toe of the dam. Two saddle dams of similar design, but with impervious membranes extending to bed-rock, close two gaps in the topography of the left bank. One of these dams is in itself a large structure with a maximum height of 345 feet and volume of 18 million cubic yards. The other is a relatively small structure 225 feet in height with a volume of 1.7 million cubic yards. Each of the three dams is designed as a zoned rockfill embankment with a blended core of silt and angular gravel set within the dam section. Suitably graded filter zones are provided on each side of the impervious core. In the design of the embankments special care has been taken to ensure that as much material as possible can be used from the excavations without re- handling. During construction of the main dam section, the river would be diverted through a channel excavated on the right bank with a capacity of 750,000 cusecs. For final diversion, the outlet tunnels would be used. 3.5 3.5 SPILLWAYS Two gated spillway structures on the left bank would discharge excess floodwaters through concrete paved chutes into a common discharge channel to be excavated along the course of a natural channel (the Dal Darra). One, the service spillway, would be operated every year, the other, the auxiliary spillway, would be used only in the case of unusually high floods. The spillway gate structures and chutes are to be founded on rock throughout. Flip buckets at the downstream ends of the spillway chutes are designed to throw the water into the air clear of the concrete structures. Energy of the flowing water would be dissipated by turbulent interaction with deep pools of water in the discharge channel. These pools are not to be excavated but are expected to be formed by erosion in the channel. Present designs envisage that the flip buckets for the service and auxiliary spillways will be about 70 and 40 feet, respectively, above the bottom of the discharge channel. The discharge channel would be constructed with its bed at a level of 1160 above MSL, which is about 70 feet above the bed of the river. The approximate length of this channel from the intersection of the two spillways to the river is 1 miles. The combined discharge capacity of the spillways is:- (i) 1,410,000 cusecs at normal retention level. (ii) 1,490,000 cusecs with surcharge of 2.2 feet. (iii) 1,670,000 cusecs with surcharge of 6.8 feet. Flood routing studies have shown that, after allowance for a flow of 132,000 cusecs through the tunnels, (ii) is sufficient to pass the "maximum probable flood", and (iii) the "maximum combined flood" stated in Section 3.8 below. 3.6 OUTLET WORKS The outlet works would consist of four tunnels each 45 feet diameter upstream of the mid-tunnel gate shafts and 43.5 feet diameter downstream except for tunnel No.4 which is 36 feet diameter downstream. These tunnels would be used for diverting the flow of the river during the later phases of constructing the embankment. One of the four tunnels is to be used permanently as an irrigation outlet. The other three will, at various stages, each be connected to four hydro- electric power units depending on the finally adopted programme of power development. 3. 4 In the flood season of the period when the tunnels are used for diversion of flow during construction of the dam they will have a combined capacity of about 430,'000 cusecs (recent model tests indicate a slightly higher figure) which is sufficient to pass an inflowing flood of about 800,000 cusecs; this is higher than anything known to have passed the site during the period of record on the Indus (at Attock). Until the conversion of tunnel No.3 to power, the two irrigation release tunnels will have a combined minimum release capacity of 125,000 cusecs (recent model studies indicate this may in fact be 136,000 cusecs), and the two power tunnels could provide an additional 30,000 cusecs, all at a drawdown level of 1,300 feet. 3.7 POWER INSTALLATION The powerhouse would be located on the right bank of the river at the foot of the dam. Initially, it would be built to house eight (1) generating units. Each unit, rated at 175 MW, would have a capability range of 183 MW under full head and low tailwater conditions to 53 MW at the 1,300 foot drawdown level. Eventually, 12 units could be installed with a total rated capacity of 2100 MW. 3.8 HYDROLOGY (a) Records No records are available for the dam site itself, but a river gauge was established in 1954 near Darband about 20 miles upstream, and stage records have been taken since then with the exception of 1959. Discharge measurements have been made since 1960, and these suggest that the rating is stable. Although sediment sampling was undertaken at Darband in 1959, only those measurements made since 1961, when more suitable equinment was introduced, can be-relied on. (b) River Inflow In order to extend the period of record of river inflow, which is too short at Darband to give reliable average values comparisons have been made between the records at Darband and Attock, where the discharge has been recorded since 1868, over the concurrent period of record 1954-58 and 1960-64. As a result the following values of Darband: Attock ratios have been agreed with TAMS and are shown in Table 3.1. (1) It is understood that designs at present may be undertaken for four generating units only. 3.5 TABLE 3.1 Ratio of 10 day flows at Darband to 10 day flows at Attock Period Ratio Period Ratio January 1-10 .63 July 1-10 .74 11-20 .63 11-20 .74 21-31 .61 21-31 .76 February 1-10 .62 August 1-10 .80 11-20 .63 11-20 .80 21-28/29 .64 21-31 .80 March 1-10 .62 September 1-10 .80 11-20 .57 11-20 .77 21-31 .55 21-30 .76 April 1-10 .49 October 1-10 .75 11-20 .46 11-20 .76 21-30 .48 21-31 .74 May 1-10 .49 November 1-10 .75 11-20 .51 11-20 .73 21-31 .57 21-30 .69 June 1-10 .65 December 1-10 .68 11-20 .68 11-20 .67 21-30 .68 21-31 .65 Using these values and the complete period of record at Attock (1868-1964), the flow duration curve for Darband shown on Figure 6 has been derived. The average monthly flows at Darband for the same period are shown in Table 3.2. TABLE 3.2 Average monthly inflow at Darband1868-1964 Month Inflow (MAF) January 1.o6 February 1.00 March 1.33 April 2.01 May 4.41 June 10.70 July 16.40 August 15.50 September 6.80 October 2.60 November 1.51 December 1.22 64.54 The Siran river makes a small contribution between Darband and Tarbela, which increases the average annual inflow to about 65.3 MAF. -3.6 (c) Design Flood TAMS have made a thorough study of the designi flood at Tarbela, which has been derived by adding the following components:- (1) Maximum flood due to snowmelt, estimated from astudy of recorded flood hydrographs to be 600,000 cusecs. (2) Maximum flood due to monsoon rainfall, estimated from synthetic unit hydrograph and probable maximum storm studies to be 1,080,000 cusecs (sub- sequently slightly revised by TAMS to 1,173,000 cusecs). (3) Maximum flood due to the breaking of a natural dam, estimated from the flood hydrograph of August 18th and l9th 1929 when a glacial dam on the Shyok was breached, to be 354,000 cusecs. (1) and (2), together, produce a "probable maximum flood" of 1,773,000 cusecs and (1), (2) and (3) together give a "maximum combined flood" of 2,127,000 cusecs. (d) Sediment Transport The results of suspended sediment sampling undertaken at Darband in the years 1960 to 1964 have been used to produce the sediment rating curve shown on Figure 7, which, in combination with the flow duration curve (Figure 6) results in an average annual suspended sediment load of 420 million short tons. The bed load is difficult to determine, but site inspection and other factors lead us to conclude that its contribution is small when compared with the suspended load, and of the order of 5 percent of the total. Total annual sediment transport is thus approximately 440 million short tons. 3.9 SEDIMENTATION OF RESERVOIR One of the most significant factors associated with the construction of a storage reservoir on the Indus is the relatively rapid rate of depletion of the reservoir volume brought about by the accumulation of sediment. Unless arrangements are made for flushing this sediment through the reservoir - and these are not feasible in the case of Tarbela- a large proportion of the sediment transported by the river will be trapped and deposited in the reservoir area. 35.7 Sediment so deposited is expected to compact to a final dry density of about 85 pounds per cubic foot. At this density the total annual sediment transport of 440 million short tons would occupy 238,000 acre feet, but in practice the trap efficiency of the reservoir will be less than 100 percent. Taking this and the filling of dead storage into account Chas. T. Main (Ref.7) expect the live storage volume (above lowest drawdown 1332 feet) to deplete at the rate of about 0.12 MAF per year for the first 20 years of its life, and to be fully depleted to a final volume of 1 MAF after about 50 years. Figure 8 shows the pattern of sediment disposition With time, and Table 3.3 shows the availability of live storage assuming that sedimentation starts during the flood season of 1975, and that lowest drawdown is 1332 feet. TABLE 3.3 Live Storage Depletion Storage Available Storage Available Storage Available Release Storage Release Storage Release Storage Period (MAF) Period (MAF) Period (MAF) 1975/76 8.48* 1995/94 6.132 2011/12 3.31 /77 8.36 /95 6.20 /13 3.14 /78 8.24 /96 6.013 /14 2.97 /79 8.12 /97 5.86 /15 2.80 /80 8.oo /98 5.69 /16 2.63 /81 7.88 /99 5.52 /17 2.46 /82 7.76 1999/2000 5.35 /18 2.29 /813 7.64 /01 5.18 /19 2.12 /84 7.52 /02 5.01 /20 1.95 /85 7.40 /10 4.84 /21 1.78 /86 7.28 /04 4.67 /22 1.61 /87 7.16 /05 4.50 /23 1.44 /88 7.04 /o6 4.35 /24 1.27 /89 6.92 /07 4.16 /25 1.10 /go 6.80 /08 31.99 /26 1.00 /91 6.68 /09 3.82 /92 6.56 /10 3.65 /93 6.44 /11 1.48 * The amount of useful storage the reservoir will be capable of retaining during the release period 1974/75 is uncertain, but for the purpose of this report we have assumed that it will be sufficient to meet our computed requirement which is 5 MAF, measured at the reservoir. Independent studies of the sedimentation rate made by Harza and ourselves confirm that the life of the reservoir is likely to be of the order of 50 years. 5.8 3.10 PROGRAMME FOR CONSTRUCTION (a) Project Status, October, 1966 The Indus Basin Development Fund is at present financing the foreign exchange component (U.S. $13 million) of certain preliminary work to be undertaken in the period 1966-67, the total cost of which is estimated at U.S. $34.8 million equivalent. Costs incurred by WAPDA prior to this period, principally on initial site investigations were approximately U.S. $19.5 million equivalent, of which U.S.$7.1 million was foreign exchange. Work in progress under WAPDA's supervision at the end of October 1966 included the following:- (i) Rail and road access to the project site. Work has started on the earthworks for the rail link to the site; tenders have been received for the supply of hardwood sleepers and for the supply and fabrication of steel bridge girders. Surveys for the access road have been completed and construction is due to start shortly. (ii) The first phase of additional quarters for WAPDA personnel. (iii) The 1_32 kV. transmission line for construction power supply is virtually complete and the left bank substation is in hand. (iv) Substructure and superstructure for the access bridge across the Indus River just downstream of the site of the dam. The two contracts have been awarded and work has commenced. (v) Replacement of intake works for the right bank Pehur canal whose present intake will be blocked by construction of the dam. A contract has been let for the supply of the pumps and work is about to start on the new section of canal. (vi) Additional exploratory works in the river alluvium beneath the downstream shell of the dam. (vii) Preparation by TAMS of contract documents and drawings. Draft design reports on the features of the project together with supporting design and information memoranda have been prepared and reviewed. Some 500 drawings and 11 volumes of draft contract documents have been completed and initially reviewed. Documents for 35 supply contracts and one supply and erection contract are in course of preparation. 3.9 (b) Construction Schedule The project is intended to start impounding water, with a restricted retention level, towards the end of the flood season of 1974, so that a limited amount of storage may be available for the release period 1974/75. Impounding to top water level (1550 feet above MSL) is scheduled for 1975, with full use of storage during the release period 1975/76. The main dam across the Indus will be constructed in three major stages, dictated by the river diversion problems particularly during flood seasons. Construction work must have reached a definite point of completion of one stage for the next stage to proceed without an intolerable risk of severe damage by floods. Stage I A working area on the right bank of the river will be cofferdammed, inside which the diversion channel and buttress- type closure structure will be completed, and dam and blanket construction started. Excavated material will be stock-piled for future use. Cofferdams will be built round the power station and outlet tunnel stilling basins and work on the power station and tunnels commenced. Excavation for the spillways and drilling of relief wells at the toe of the main dam will start. This stage is scheduled to take three years, leading up to diversion of the river into the diversion channel after the flood season of 1970. In view of the large amount of work involved this part of the programme is particularly critical, and in the view of Chas. T. Main (Ref.7) it will be essential for the contract to be awarded by September 1967 if the planned schedule is to be maintained. Stage II With the river diverted, cofferdams will be constructed across the river, inside which construction of the main dam and blanket can proceed. Work on the spillways and the right bank dam will continue, the power station will commence,- and the tunnels will be substantially completed. This stage is also scheduled to take three years, and will be completed after the flood season of 1973, when river flows are diverted from the diversion channel into the right bank power and irrigation tunnels. Completion of the tunnels up to the stage that they can be used for river diversion is the most critical factor during this stage. 3,10 Stage III Following the closing of the gates in the buttress- type closure structure the downstream end of the diversion channel will be cofferdammed, and the closure of the main dam across the channel commenced. To ensure its safety during the flood season of 1974 the schedule calls for the dam to be at least at elevation 1450 feet by that time. Rapid completion of the closure section is thus essential and is the most critical factor during this stage. Power Station The substructure and superstructure for the first four units of the power station are scheduled for completion by July 1974. The first two generating units will be ready to run when penstock connections are completed and at the same time erection of the third and fourth units will be well advanced. If the dams have reached safe elevations and the spillways are completed by August 1st 1974, the plan is to close the two power tunnels (Nos.l and 2) and store water on the receding flood flow. Immediately following closure of these tunnels, tunnel No.1 will be connected to the four units of the power station, the first two units of which are scheduled to be ready for commercial operation by April 1975. 3.11 COST ESTIMATES (a) Capital Costs., Cost estimates for the project as prepared for the purposes of the preliminary report and now confirmed by Chas T. Main are shown in the attached Table 3.4, and amount to an economic cost of U.S. $625 million, of which U.S. $390 million involves foreign exchange. The make-up of the principal item, contract costs, is shown in detail in Table 3.5. The following items are not included:- i) Pakistani income tax. ii) Customs, duties and excise taxes. iii) Local fees and octroi taxes. (iv) Interest during construction. (v) Allowance for inflation. vi) The cost of power facilities, which are considered with power benefits. The estimated financial requirements for the project are stated in the Bank Report of February 15, 1965 to be of the order of U.S. $900 million equivalent, of which approximately U.S. $550 million involves foreign exchange. These figures include items (v) and (vi) above, and a financial contingency. TABLE 3.4 TARBELA DAM COST ESTIMATE FOR ECONOMIC ANALYSIS FOREIGN TOTAL COST EXCHANGE $ EQUIVALENT $ 1. PRE-CONTRACT COSTS 4,700,000 16,490,000 2. CONTRACT COSTS 269,545,000 390,404,615 3. PRE-CONTRACT PLUS CONTRACT COSTS 274,245,000 406,894,615 (MAIN - TARBELA REPORT) DIRECT COSTS (210,957,700) (312,995,858) INDIRECT COSTS (30% OF DIRECT) ( 63,287,300) ( 93.898,757) t4. ADJUSTED PRE-CONTRACT PLUS CONTRACT COSTS (IBRO - TARBELA REPORT) DIRECT COSTS (MAIN) 210,957,700 312,995,858 ADDITIONAL DIRECT COSTS EXCAVATION AND FILL 5,190,000 7,700,000 CONCRETE 1,550,000 2,300,000 6,740,000 10,000,000 ADJUSTED DIRECT COSTS 217,697,700 322.995,858 INDIRECT COSTS (MAIN) 63,287,300 93,898,757 ADDITIONAL INDIRECT COSTS 9,435,900 14,000,000 ADJUSTED INDIRECT COSTS (33.14% OF DIRECT) 72,723,200 107,898,757 DIRECT PLUS INDIRECT COSTS (ADJUSTED) 290,420,900 430,894,615 USE (430,900,000) PRE-CONTRACT COSTS 4,700,000 16,500,000 CONTRACT COSTS 284,000,000 414,400,000 5. CONTINGENCIES (20% of 4.) 57,700,000 86,200,000 6. PRE-CONTRACT COSTS, CONTRACT COSTS AND CONTINGENCIES 346,400,000 517,100,000 7. ENGINEERING AND ADMINISTRATION (7% of 6.) 30,000,000 36,200,000 8. INSURANCE & MISCELLANEOUS PLUS PERFORMANCE BOND (i.52% of 6.) 13,000,000 13,000,000 INSURANCE AND MISICELLANEOUS (9,000.000) (9,000,000) PERFORMANCE BOND (4.000.000) (4,000,000) 9. LAND AND RESETTLEMENT (WAPDA) __- _59,000,000 10. TOTAL ( 6 + 7 + 8 +9 ) $389,400,000 $625,300,000 USE $390,000,000 $625,000,000 TABLE 3. 5 TARBELA DAM Estimated CCrti-.iCt COS ts for Econ om ic AnaIy s is (No Pak.star. taxes, dufle,. e,tc. i.icluded) UP! T PP I CE ITEM TOTAL TOTAL W 0R K I T Er ULIIT WOAITITY $ S$EQUIV4ALENT CONTRACT WDSTS DIVERSION & CARE OF WATER Steel Cellular Cofferdamsn S. 2,32'l.400 4,457,700 CoIffedasC.. 720.003 .7636 1 . 0425 5149.900 750,578 Ecain, Common, Ciiannelc.. 0,6.0 185 677 '4737 6.832 E cavti, Rock. Chaneel (.0. 5.36.000 11139 2.33'14 6,610.210 13,857,054 Concrete, DO,,ersiox Structure c.r. 325.100 15.114 55.35 '4,923,639 17,995,584 Apipurti.winces, Dhiversion 9tructure L..S- 8,5514.000 14,2142,800 CofferdAms C.y. 1.020.000 7637 i.014214 779,025 1,063,319 Excavation, Common. Channel ti,k..e. ~ ... 2.1429.000 .14696 .67117 1.1140,560 1,638,8146 2 Excavation. Rock, Channel ip..icx. 3314.000 1.01144 2.2708 338.806 758,460 [,cauvation. Coemnon Rover Alluvium C.o. 2.200.000 .7379 1.0060 1,623,336 2,213,3514 3 Borrix. Lion Spoil ci,. 3.450,000 .10140 .1560 38,800 530.200 ____ SU6TOTIL 319 73 614.3714.221 145,1499,7149 EII8ANI(MO,V1 &BSLANKIET Abuticert &I foundation Preparation E.bankment L.S. 2,090,1400 10.692.240 1 Cert,sct 1 Foundation Preparation Blanket L.S. 213,200 7SI,'l00 Pe.vious Zoese c.y. 11.5314.000 .0390 .1170 1149.982 1,349.9116 & Imipervioos Z,,nes c.y. 1,271,000 1.1618 1.143114 1.476,658 1.819.3146 Transitive 7nc,et tc. 537.000 .4810 .6630 258,297 356.031 2 Diainaac Blenk.et c.y. 422.000 .0390 .1170 16.1158 149,3714 ls.pxrvlo.. Cloaniat (..y. 5,565.000 1.08714 1.i1339 6,051,611 7,979,7110 Abutme-t S Foundation Pieparatone Emibankment L.S 2.090.1100 10.6112.2140 Contact A fou.i3ation rropi.r.nton Blanket L.S. 1,309,100 14,616.300 Pervioce Zropu c.y. 64.,395,000 .0952 .1918 6.133.1814 12.351.352 lmpo.~ioun lor.e~ C-~ 8,722.00 .9517 1.3025 3.300.987 11.3649.212 Ivons-tion Z.-es c.y. 1,798.000 .5131 .7223 922.651 1.298.6814 Drainage Biarnet c.R. I,14G0,000 .0390 .1170 56.940 170,820 Impervious Blankeot c.y. 17.471.000 .7358 1.0319 12,855.160 18.029,022 3 ;ounodaution A Preparation Embanknent L.S. 1. 135,560 5,717.1410 erviou Zones c.n. 18.685,000 .5326 .7600 9.952,348 114,200.0314 Impervious Zones c.y. 2.158,000 1.0050 1.3399 2, 168,853 2,7118, 168 Transition Zones c.y. 5140,000 .11810 .6630 259,740 348.020 Impervious Blanket c.y. 692,000 1.2296 1.5013 850,930 1,038.9117 Abutment Preparation Embankment L.S. 325,000 1.731.600 Pervious zones c.Y. 17.982.000 .5642 .8086 10,1146.578 114.5143.577 Impervious Zones c.p. 2,2149,000 I 1511 1.11215 2.588,935 3.197.0614 Transition Zones c.Y. 350.000 .4010 .6630 168,350 232.050 Wasste c.y. 1.000.000 .14955 .7527 1155 752.700 _____ SUBTOTAL. 70,317,182 126.0145,015 96.797,227 AUXILIARY EM8ANKNEOTS Eocavation, Common A Rock c.y. 7.639.000 .5922 9276 14, 524, 227 7.086,058 Abutment & Foundation Preparation L.S. 1.287.000 8.009,300 Cut-off at Upystreami End Impervious Blanket L.S. 69,700 1470,600 Pervious Zones c.y.- 13,088.000 .14631 7133 6,060.528 9,335.800 lInperainut Zones c.p. 2,305,000 1.17S8 1.4189 2.592.676 3,128.7814 Transition Zones c.y. 599,000 .4010 .6630 288.119 397.137 Impervious Blanket c.o. 3,380,000 .9778 1.2335 3.305,105 14,169,262 Waste c.y. 2. 140,000 .11955 .7527 1.060,4198 1,610.778 ____ SUBTOTAL 19.207.855 311,207,719 26,394.350 SERVICE SPILLWAY 111FT BSNXI Excavation Commnon c.y. 38.933.000 .5717 .8016 22.258,298 31,207.801 Excavation Rock c.y. 12,803.000 1.0568 2.5405 13.529,883 32.525.782 Foundation Preparation & Misc. Items L.$. '4,1314,000 9,326.800 Concrete C.p. 659.700 12.142 51.38 8.190,175 33,892,7147 Crest Gates and Hoist LIS. 1,561,300 __1.149.2003 _____ SUIBTOTAL. 49,673.656 108,1014.330 72,384,650 AUXILIARY SPILL.WAY (LEFTF BANK) Excavation, Common c.y. 1400,000 .7072 1.01465 282,680 '418,600 Excavation, Rock C.Y. 1.970,000 1.1807 2.6773 2.325.900 5.2714.378 Foundation Preparation A Misc. Items L.S. 1,821.300 '4,748.900 Concrete c.y. 1481.500 12.61 51.18 6,071,715 24.643.651 Crest Gates and Hoists L.i. _2.007.200 1,478,100 ____ SUBTOTAL 12.508,995 36.563.629 20,190.1429 DIVERSION AVE IRRIGATION TUNNELS ABS PROVISIONS FOR FUTUIRE POWER Excavation, Open Cut, Inlet, Common c.p. 199.000 .7678 .91422 152.785 187,5114 Excavation. Open Cat, Inlet, Rock c.y. 6. 171,000 1.29714 2.8761 8.006.090 17,748,5314 Excavation, Open Cut. Outlet. Common c.Y. 1,255,000 .7661 .9395 96114142 1.179,0814 Excavation, Open Cut. Outlet. Rocli c.y. 3,596,000 1.2995 2.8761 11.672.929 10,3142.527 Excavation, Tunnels c.p. 822,000 12.40 214.75 10,193.586 20,3143.570 Escavation, Shafts, Open Cat c.Y. 146,000 .7995 *99'47 36.777 '45,75B Excavation, Shaft c.Y. 162,000 18.59 37.09 3,011.580 6.008,1418 Concrete Tunneal Lining II Shafts c.y. 5141,200 15.71 56.28 8.1499,005 '30,1457,1I2 Concrete in Intakes c.y. 337.000 21.23 714.91 7.1514,173 25.2413.322 Concrete in Outlets and Stilling Basin& c.o. 826.200 11,79 148.148 9,7141,7214 40.040,957 Steal Lieers Ihs. 33.408,000 .2795 .3602 9.337,536 12.030,220 Gates and Hoists L,S. 7.697,3D0 6.185,1100 Grouting and Drainage L.S. 1,560,000 9,903,1400 Foundation Preparation 9 Misc. Items L.S. 114.836.200 26,283.100 _____ SUBTOTAL 8S,861,127 205,998,916 129,138.210 CONTRACT COSTS J 269.5414,568 575,293.830 390.4011,615 I/ Contract Coats include a markup of 30%, to cover indirect costa (see text, page .) July 1964 costs, prices, wage rates and general conditions assumed to prevail for duration of job. CHAPTER 4 THE USE AND BENEFITS OF TARBELA WATER 4.1 INTRODUCTION The programme for the development of irrigation and agriculture in West Pakistan, as outlined in Chapter 2, is based on the development of an integrated system of water suppl3 The three major components on the supply side of this integrated system will be the surface storage reservoirs to be provided at Mangla in 1967/8 and at Tarbela in 1974/5 and the exploitation of the extensive groundwater aquifers of the Indus Plains by tubewell fields. In this report we have considered separately the contributions that will be made by the Tarbela component to the irrigation system and to electricity supply, and have evaluated the benefits attributable to them. This has been done in the case of irrigation by calculating for each canal command the additional surface water to be used in the projected development of the Basin during those months of the year when storage releases from the surface reservoirs are required. In this analysis we determined first the quantities of water that will be served into the canal systems over and above the historically recorded use and then the proportion of these increments provided at Tarbela. Due allowance was made for the associated increase in recharge to the groundwater aquifer wherever this makes a valuable contribution to tubewell abstraction. As described in Section 4.3 we have then calculated the crop values that can be attributed to the incremental water use. The direct use of incremental scarce surface water during rabi has been evaluated on the basis of rabi crop values. For the associated groundwater recharge, average annual crop values have been applied for the reason that tubewell water can be pumped any time of the year. Values have been attributed only to Tarbela surface water deliveries that are made in times of scarcity and all calculations have been based on average conditions of river flows and crop yields. In the case of power, as will be seen from Section 4.4 a comparison of the earlier analysis of benefits carried out by the Power Consultants (Ref.2) and the programme given in their recent report (Ref.6) has led us to use the earlier figures unchanged. 4.1 4.2 IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT WITH TARBELA (a) Irrigation System The conveyance of irrigation supplies from the storage reservoir at Tarbela and their use within the canal system of the Basin, can conveniently be considered by dividing the system into distribution zones which are related to their sources of surface water supplies. An indication of the destination of supplies released from storage at Tarbela can be obtained by considering,the projected consumption of stored water at the watercourses in each command and distribution zone in the reference years 1975, 1985 and 2000. The method of deriving these projected increases in stored water use is described in the following Section 4.2 (b). The distribution zones adopted for this purpose are shown in Figure 9 and are as follows:- (i) Canals commanded by Kabul and Swat rivers in the Vale of Feshawar, which do not receive supplies directly from the Indus and in which the projected surface water requirements in rabi may be lower than at present. (ii) Canals commanded by the Indus alone, and which are fed directly from Jinnah, Chasma and Taunsa headworks. The projected increases in stored water requirements in this zone are less than one tenth of the total increase for the Basin. (iii) Canals commanded jointly by the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab rivers, and which are supplied from Trimmu, Sidhnai and Panjnad headworks in the northern part of the zone, and from Gudu, Sukkur and Ghulam Mohammed headworks in the southern part. The projected increases in the use of stored water at the water- course in this zone represent over half of those in the Basin as a whole. (iv) Canals commanded by the Jhelum alone, and which are fed directly from Mangla and Rasul headworks. In this zone the projected surface water requirements may be in rabi less than at present. (v) Canals commanded jointly by the Jhelum and Chenab rivers and which are supplied from Khanki, Qadirabad, Balloki, Suleimanke and Islam headworks. The projected increase in stored water use at the watercourse in this zone varies through time from one third to one sixth of that for the Basin as a whole. These additional requirements may be met by using Jhelum and Chenab supplies which would otherwise be used further downstream, where Indus supplies would be substituted instead. 4.2 (vi) Canals commanded by the Chenab alone, and which are fed from Marala headworks. The projected increase in use of surface supplies at the watercourse during the storage release period in this zone varies from one fifth to one tenth of the total increase for the Basin, and this could also be met by substitution with Indus supplies. The canal system and the main canal commands of the Basin which were included in our analysis of stored water use are shown in Figure 10. The canal commands contained in the distribution zones described above are given in Table 4.1 in section 4.2(b) and a fuller description of the distribution zones is given in Appendix B of this report. Table 4.1 also includes the projected use of stored water at the watercourse in each distribution zone in the reference years 1975, 1985 and 2000. These zonal stored water requirements are also expressed as percentages of the total projected increase in stored water use throughout the Basin. The percentages give an indication of the potential distribution and use within the system, of releases from storage at Tarbela particularly during the early years of operation. It is evident that although most of the requirement at the watercourses for supplies released from storage will arise in the zone commandable from Tarbela downstream of the T-S-M-B Link, over one third will nevertheless be attributable to areas not directly supplied from the Indus. In the latter areas the increased requirements may be provided by substitution of Tarbela releases for Jhelum and Chenab supplies which would otherwise have been used in the area commandable from the Indus. (b) Stored Water Use (i) Storage Requirements at Tarbela The surface storage requirements of the Basin which are associated with the proposed irrigation development programme outlined in Chapter 2, were projected by means of analyses firstly of the anticipated water requirement in the canal commands at the relevant state of development, and secondly of the distribution of surface water' supplies throughout the canal system. The surface water requirements for each reference year were derived from the canal command analysis and were accumulated at the barrage pond or headworks from which they would be drawn. The water requirements at the headworks were 4.3 then transferred upstream through the distribution network of link canals and river reaches to the rim stations. At the rim stations various conditions of river flow were compared with the water requirements, and by means of this comparison the monthly surplus or shortage in flow was determined from which the storage requirements were derived for each reference year. The projected storage requirements at Tarbela which were obtained from this analysis have been stated previously in Chapter 2 for the reference years. (ii) Tarbela Release Pattern In deriving a release pattern for Tarbela reservoir, slightly greater significance has been given to yearsof low rabi flow than to mean flow. Indus discharges are characterised by greater variations from the mean of flows during March, April and May than in the earlier rabi months, and shortages and demands on storage could occur even up to the middle of May. Taking these factors into consideration, the release pattern for Tarbela which was adopted ih our studies was as follows : Tarbela Release Pattern (percent of useful storage) Storage Release Reservoir Filling Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May. Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Nil 8 11 21 26 19 10 5 -45 -55 Nil Nil The basic principle adopted has been to spread surface water deficiencies evenly throughout the period as a proportion of the total irrigation requirement, shortages to some extent being met by temporary over-pumping of groundwater in certain canal commands. Some allowance has been made for the demands of electrical operation if these do not conflict with the irrigation requirements. Maintaining an operational reserve of storage for release from Tarbela in April and May has the effect of minimising the pumping of groundwater in those months, and increasing hydro generation at a period when peaking capability is at its lowest. 4.4 (iii) Scarce Water Period The scarce water period was taken to be the period in rabi when irrigation demands at the rim stations exceed the river inflow under the mean year flow condition. Since the reservoir release period has not been based on the mean year but on more critical conditions it is longer than the scarce water period. A small amount of storage would thus be retained in the reservoir at the end of the scarce water period especially for reserve use during lower than normal April and May flows. The scarce water periods adopted and the operation reserve in each of the reference years were as follows : Reference Scarce Water Operation Reserve, Year Period percent of storage _ __ _capacity 1975 November to March 15 1985 November to April 5 2000 October to May - The corresponding live storage capacity at Tarbela and the volume available for release from storage in the scarce water period were as follows for each of the reference years :- Reference Tarbela Tarbela storage available Year Capacity in scarce water period MAF MAF On completion (1975) 8.6 7.3 1985 7.4 7.0 2000 5.4 5.4 (iv) Increase in Stored Water Requirements at the Watercourse The level of-~-surface water use at the watercourse which was adopted as th& bA1s. of availability of surface supplies prior to the provision--=of Tor,ed water was termed the historic use. The historic uses wernd--4ter±,ved from the mean monthly canal head withdrawals during-tAi;,eleveA-year period 1952-63, with allowance for canal losses betW,eh the headworks and the watercourse outlets. 4.5 According to the projected state of development in each command as proposed in the programme of groundwater and canal development outlined in Chapter 2, the future surface water requirements at the watercourse were determined for each of the reference years. The projected demand for surface water in the scarce water period increases mainly in relation to the projected increase in the intensity of rabi cropping in each command. Increases in the projected surface water requirements above the historic use at the watercourse in the scarce water period would have to be met by means of releases of stored water. The projected stored water requirements under mean year conditions at the watercourses throughout the Basin are as follows :- Reference Basin Stored Water Requirements Year at Watercourse in Scarce Water Period MAF 1975 2.67 1985 5.45 2000 12.18 The total stored water requirements at the watercourse, were interpolated from the amounts shown above for each year of the period under review and are shown in column 4 of Table 6.4. (v) Availability and Use of Tarbela Storage at the Watercourse For the purpose of evaluating the benefits of Tarbela storage releases for irrigation, it was necessary to determine the proportion of these releases which would reach the watercourse. Tarbela storage releases will form part of the storage requirements and releases in the Basin as a whole. The distribution losses from Tarbela storage releases, and consequently the quantities delivered to the watercourses from Tarbela, were therefore assumed to be of the same proportion as the general average losses from Basin storage releases as a whole (see note on page 4.7). The resulting quantities available at the watercourse from Tarbela storage were interpolated for each year as shown in Column 5 of Table 5.4 from the following amounts for the reference years :- Reference Tarbela Stored Water Available Year at Watercourse in Scarce Water Period MAF 1975 2.67* 1985 4.29 2000 2.93 *Stored water requirement at watercourse for 1975. 4.6 NOTE: The potential quantity of stored water released from Tarbela which would be available during the scarce water period at the watercourse, expressed as T (WC), was obtained from the following relationship :- T (WC) = 04(C X T(R) where Q (WC) = Increment above historic use of total Basin stored water requirement at the watercourse Q (R) ¢ Increment in Basin storage requirement above storage assumed required for Sutlej and Ravi replacement, and T (R) = Storage available at Tarbela in the scarce water period. The quantity of stored water from Tarbela actually used at the watercourse in.each year was taken to be either the Basin stored water requirement at the watercourse during the scarce water period, or the Tarbela stored water available at the watercourse, whichever is less. The relevant quantities are shown in Column 6 of Table 5.4 for each year. It can be reasoned that since in October some pumped water will be used as complementary to the incremental surfa'ce deliveries an appropriate pumping cost should be deducted. Since however this cost is less than one percent of the agricultural NPV it has been treated as negligible. (vi) Recharge from Tarbela. In order to calculate the full agricultural benefit from Tarbela, account most be taken not only of the immediate use of Tarbela storage water at the watercourse, but also of any benefits and costs resulting from the additional groundwater recharge arising out of the supply of this incremental surface water. -In-principle, benefit may be derived from using the recharge obtainable from the usable groundwater areas, while costs will be incurred-in pumping both this usable recharge and also the unusable recharge in the saline areas which require drainage. In the usable -g-roundwater zones the recharge from the projected incremefit-of surface supplies above historic deliveries in the scarce-water--pe-r--i4d was calculated separately for (a) Link Canals, (b) Ca -(-c) fields and watercourses. River recharge WasAs t6.be unchanged on the assumption that the existence of surface storage would merely redistribute river flows without significantly affecting the total annual flow. (a) Incremental Link Canal recharge in the scarce water periods was calculated as that proportion of the annual recharge attributable to the incremental surface storage use at watercourse durink the scarce water period; (b) The incremental recharge from canals was taken as 80 percent of incremental canal losses, and (c) Tthe incremental recharge from field and watercourse losses was taken as 23 percent of incremental watercourse deliveries. The total increase in usable recharge in the scarce water periods over historic recharge is thus the sum of these three forms of recharge. The projected quantities of usable recharge attributable to the releases of stored water during the scarce water period in the reference years are given in Table 4.1 for the various distribution zones. In usable groundwater areas this recharge may be pumped and when used for irrigation, will contribute towards further recharge. This cyclical process has been included in the calculation by increasing recharge by the sum of the series of irrigation uses, which is approximately 30 percent. Not all this water has a value however, since some of it is pumped during the summer months, when surface water is freely available, in order to balance abstractions against the recharge to the aquifer. This reservation applies only in the early years after 1975. Furthermore, any recharge to private tubewell areas has no immediate value since it cannot be recovered by private tubewells which will not be able to pump even the historic recharge in these areas. By deducting these quantities from the total recharge, the valuable recharge from the total incremental use of surface water was obtained. The proportion of this recharge which can be attributed to Tarbela was assumed to be the same as the proportion of Tarbela use at the watercourse to total incremental use of surface water at the watercourse. The quantity of valuable recharge derived in this way varies from 0.35 MAF in 1975 to 1.50 in 1985 as shown in column 9 of Table 5.4. The incremental recharge in the saline groundwater zones from canals, fields and watercourses was derived as the total incremental recharge in a canal command less the incremental recharge in the usable groundwater zone. The recharge in saline areas from link canals was calculated in the same way as for the usable groundwater areas. Part of thissaline recharge is in 4.8 * >:5 S g Sddo o dodoo ol 38 ; A, SR PS * 8 I Iu I I 8 ° d dd A , a~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ej d Id o; a d l+| SoZsf .S°|*|1; ; 47 d 67ddd,>1 ddooooo|NSoodo3ddd-" 'o31o > Sd i t TS S II r7d 's _1, k.0 0f - j 32; co 52 03 0: di 4G as Ss - S~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~ S s rD L ,j: ,{ it et 9 L~~~~~dd n ad C; rh ro ., p 3Nii g Fr~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~ .s s 1: ' i1 r ;* rM e a~~~It ' areas with deep groundwater where there is no drainage requirement. The cost of draining the remainder of the saline recharge was determined from our Comprehensive Report. The drainage costs per acre-foot were derived from the Comprehensive Report, Volume 6, Annexure 8, Chapter 4, and were calculated to be Rs 33/AF and Rs 18/AF for a 2 cusec and 4 cusec tubewell respectively. Where horizontal drainage is proposed, the cost relating to drainage by a 2 cusec tubewell was applied. The costs of saline drainage of Tarbela water are shown in Column 14 of Table 5.4. (vii) Canal Remodelling Enlargement of a canal system increases the consumption of surface water within the canal command. In some canal commands some of this increase occurs during the Tarbela storage release period. The increase in the use of surface water in the canal command areas during this period, which was made possible by enlargement of the canals, was calculated for each reference year from the data derived for our Comprehensive Study. The proportion of this increase which is supplied from Tarbela was calculated by considering the ratio of Tarbela use at the watercourse to the total incremental surface water use during the storage release period. The cost of the enlargement programme, given in Part IV of our Comprehensive Report, was related to the total increase in surface water supplies made available by canal enlargement at the watercourse, and the cost of providing an additional acre-foot of surface water was found to be Rs 7. The product of this unit cost and the additional water from enlargement supplied by Tarbela has been included as an associated cost of Tarbela in Column 15 of Table 5.4. 4.3 AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT WITH TARBELA (a) Introduction In this section we give for ease of reference certain background information on the present state of agriculture on the Indus Plains and more particularly we present a summary of IACA's projected developments in agriculture arising out of their proposed pr-ogramme of development works, which includes the Tarbela project, together with our estimate of the value of Tarbela water. The descriptive material is confined to the Indus Plains and excludes irrigated and rainfed areas in other parts of West Pakistan which would be unaffected by the Tarbela Project. 4.9 The estimated population of West Pakistan is about 51 million and is expanding rapidly. The rate used in official calculations in 1965 was 2.6 percent a year, but more recent studies of population growth indicate that it might be higher and probably about 3 percent. About three quarters of the people live on the Indus Plains and about two thirds of these live in rural areas. Thus the rural population of the Plains is about 26 million. Most of the population of West Pakistan derive a livelihood directly or indirectly from agriculture which, excluding processing industries, contributes about 45 percent of the Gross Domestic Product. Agricultural production has shown disappointing progress viewed over the last twenty years but there have been recent indications of a marked improvement. Up to 1960 progress was slight but since that date a rate of growth of about 3 percent has been attained, albeit using a rather low reference year in 1959-60. This recent growth is attributed to both increases in cropped acres and improvement in yields within the canal irrigated lands of the Indus Plains which now contribute about 80 percent of the food crop production of the Province and almost all the fibre crop production. The recorded culturable commanded area (CCA) of the plains amounts to about 3531 million acres although only about 25 million acres at present receive systematic water deliveries. For their programme and projections IACA have taken a lower CCA of 29.4 million acres (by omitting some low quality uncultivated land and by making allowance for infrastructure in the Lower Indus region). With the perennial pattern of cropping that is practised in a large part of the Plains some 28.1 million acres are cropped annually of which about 54 percent are devoted to rabi crops. (b) Crops Grown in the Indus Plains The main crops grown in irrigated areas are: in kharif Rice (coarse and fine) (summer) Cotton Maize Millets Fodder Pulses in rabi Wheat (winter) Fodder Oilseeds Gram and other Pulses 4.10 Perennial Sugarcane Fruit Vegetables Wheat and fodder in the rabi season, and rice, cotton and fodder in kharif are the main crops in the canal irrigated areas. Sugarcane, fruit and vegetables are also important cash crops to the farmer. (c) Present Crop Production (i) Cropping intensities and cropping patterns The cropping intensities which prevail under the present canal system are much lower than the land can support. The availability of water varies greatly between the canal commands of the Plains but in general the demand exceeds supply, except in some areas which are still under development. Whereas the maximum attainable intensity is about 150 percent and even higher in some areas, the intensity in 1965 of the whole of the Plains averaged 96 percent thus leaving a large potentiality for the expansion of cropped acreage. For the purposes of IACA's Comprehensive Report studies the Indus Plains were divided into seven regions, which are convenient geographical units :- 1. Bari Doab 2. Rechna Doab 3. Chaj Doab 4. Sutlej and Panjnad Left Bank Region 5. Thal Doab and Indus Right Bank Region 6. Peshawar and Swat Region 7. Lower Indus Region (Sind) Within these regions there are great differences in the canal command cropping intensities. The highest intensity, 169 percent, is found in the Peshawar and Swat Region, whereas the lowest, 47 percent, is found in Sind. In Table 4.2 are recorded the present average intensities and cropped acreage of the culturable commanded areas in each region. 4.11 TABLE 4.2 Average Intensities of the Regions of the Indus Plains CCA Average Cropping Total Cropped M.Acre Intensity Acreage percent M.Acre Bari Doab 5.9 102 6.0 Rechna Doab 4.7 106 5.0 Chaj Doab 2.0 105 2.1 Sutlej & Panjnad L.B. 3.5 92 3.2 Thal & Indus R.B. 3.6 64 2.3 Peshawar & Swat 0.7 155 0.9 Sind 9.0 97 8.8 29.4 96 28.3 From this table it can be seen that the Peshawar and Swat Region is the best developed irrigated area of the Plains.The second best developed areas are the Doabs in the Punjab, although as stated earlier great differences exist within these regions. The Thal and Indus Right Bank Regions in the Punjab are well below the others. Within all regions substantial differences exist between the cropping patterns adopted by farmers, because of differences in the water distribution system (perennial or non perennial water supplies), climate and soils, land tenure, farm size and markets and processing facilities. IACA have grouped canal commands with similar crop distributions into the following nine specific agricultural regions which differ from the geographic regions stated above. I Peshawar and Swat II Punjab rice area III Puinjab cotton area IV Punjab development area V Sind cotton area VI Gudu and Sukkur perennial rice area VII Gudu and Sukkur non perennial rice area VIII Ghulam Mohammed non perennial rice area IX Ghulam Mohammed perennial area 4.12 The average cropping pattern for each of the nine regions are listedin Table 4.3.. In this table the minor, crops are combined under 'other crops'. Figures are rounded off. TABLE 4.3. Cropping Patterns of Agricultural Regions (percent of CCA) Peshawar Punjab Punjab Punjab Sind Gudu/ Gudu/ Ghulam Ghulam Swat rice cotton Dev. Cotton Sukkur Sukkur Mohammed Mohammed area Per. N.Per. N.Per. Per Crops I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX Kharif Rice 1 24 2 2 3 37 68 77 9 Cotton 5 17 5 21 3 1 9 Fodder 5 7 9 6 9 3 6 1 2 Other Crops 38(l) 8 10 10 6 3 5 2 1 _ 44 T 3 23 759 T_ 79 BT 21 Rabi Wheat 36 37 31 26 21 24 18 (2) 5 (2) 11 Fodder 8 12 11 4 5 15 17(2) 4(2) 5 Other 2(2 crops 1 4 7 7 13 16 23 12(2) 3 5755 53_ 21 1 Perennial(3)) Sugarcane fruit and vegetables_23 5 7 2 5 2 - 1 7 135 107 101 T6 BE 105 137 __0 _i (1) Mainly Maize (2) Crops grown on residual soil moisture (3) Perennial crops counted twice in total annual intensity. Wheat occupies an important part of all the perennial cropping patterns and furthermore is also grown on residual moisture in the non perennial areas. Fodders again have, as might be expected, a fairly uniform distribution throughout the Plains. The distribution of the rice and cotton lands is however more clearly defined by soil and climatic factors. 4.13. The areas of Sind and the Punjab that are still in course of development (Regions IV and IX) have as yet low cash crop production. (ii) Yields Crop yields in West Pakistan are amongst the lowest in the world and this is largely attributable to shortages and irregularities in the water supply, limited use of fertilizers and pesticides, poor quality of seed leading to low plant population, and the occurrence of waterlogging and salinity. Additional factors depressing production are unsatisfactory agricultural and irrigation practices and inadequate supporting services. Within the Plains yields of specific crops vary greatly owing mainly to differences in climate, water supplies and standards of cultivation. Based on statistical information and their own studies, IACA has estimated the present crop yields of all canal commands and have grouped these in the same agricultural regions as used in Table 4.3. The average yields of the main crops in these regions are listedin Table 4.4. Table 4.4 Present Average Yields of Main Crops (inaunds per acre) Peshawar Punjab Punjab Punjab Sind Gudu/ Gudu/ Ghulam Ghulam Swat rice cotton Dev. cotton Sukkur Sukkur Mohammed Mohamme area Per. N.Per N.Per Per Regions I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX Coarse rice (1) 14 19 14 10.5 13 16.5 16 6 8 Fine (1) rice 17.5 Cotton 6.r7 7 8.5 6.5 7.5 4 4 4 4 Wheat 12 11 13.5 10 12.5 9.5 5.53) 23) 8 Gur 36 30 36 27 22 24 14 20 30 Fruit 80 80 80 70 60 50 45 40 75 Vegeta- bles ')140 140 140 lo 100 90 70 70 130 Kharif fodder 250 220 230 180 180 160 150 100 130 Rabi3) 3 Fodder 500 460 550 360 320 260 503 403) 300 1) unhusked rice 2) Kharif and rabi vegetables 3) dubari/bosi crops 4.14 (iii) Present Crop Production and Production Values From records of cropped acreages of the regions and the estimated yields IACA has calculated the present production volumes and gross production values for each crop in the Plains and these are recorded in Table 4.5 TABLE 4.5 Present Total Production by Crops (million tons) (Rs million) Wheat 3.52 1,226 Cotton 1.10 882 Coarse ricex) 1.38 389 Fine rice .44 201 Maize .44 129 Millet .24 69 Gram .30 115 Other rabi pulses .05 27 Kharif pulses .05 28 Oilseeds .28 181 Sugarcane (gur) 1.50 721 Fruit .82 240 Vegetables .51 150 Tobacco .01 28 Other crops .o6 33 Kharif fodder 17.83 _ Rabi fodder 45.16 - X)Unhusked rice 4,419 The dominant contributions of the total GPV of crops are made by wheat, cotton, sugarcane and rice. The total for these crops amounts to 77 percent of the GPV of the Plains. The share of each region in the total gross production value, and the gross production value per cropped acre in each region is shown in Table 4.6. TABLE 4.6 Present Gross Production Value of Crops by Regions CCA Total Value Average Value (MAc) (Rs million) (Rs per cropped acre) Bari Doab 5.9 995 165 Rechna Doab 4.7 919 182 Chaj Doab 2.0 373 180 Sutlej and Panjnad Left Bank 3.5 518 161 Thal and Indus Right Bank 3.6 260 113 Peshawar anu Swat 0.7 233 251 Sind 9.0 1,121 128 4,419 4.15 (d) Animrial Husbandry One of the most striking aspects of agriculture in West Pakistan is the abundance of livestock found in all cultivated parts of the Plains. Practically all cultivating, threshing and transport is dependent on animal power, requiring large numbers of draught animals and in addition large numbers of production animals are kept. The livestock population of West Pakistan is about 45.2 million head, excluding poultry, and the work animals and their young account for about 25 percent. The other 75 percent of the animal population produce the milk and most of the meat supplies. The Indus Plains provide about 70 percent of the total animal products of the Province. Table 4.7 gives the production of meat and milk by geographic regions. The distribution of this production follows a pattern which is similar to that of the human population and hence consumption. TABLE 4.7 Present Milk and Meat Production for Human Consumption (Thousand tons) Region Milk Meat from Meat from Total production work Meat animals animals Bari Doab 1,265 57 13 70 Rechna Doab 909 41 12 51 ChaJ Doab 438 20 6 26 Sutlej and Panjnad Left Bank 419 19 7 26 Thal and Indus Right Bank 351 16 7 23 Peshawar and Swat 132 7 2 9 Sind 815 44 16 60 4,3529 27_ _ 7) x) Meat production from poultry in the Plains is estimated at between 2000 and 3000 tons From these figures it can be concluded that, expressed as milk equivalents, the average per capita consumption of milk and milk products amounts to 114 kg per year. The per capita meat consumption is low at 7.0 kg per year. About 18 percent of the total cropped acreage in the Plains are used for the production of fodders of various kinds. 4.16 Actually the area drawn upon by livestock is much larger because crop residues provide about half the required animal nutrient supply and large areas are also used only for grazing or browsing. Based on the TDN (total digestible nutrients) supply from green fodder, crop residues and grazing, the TDN consumption by work animals and the production of milk, meat, and by-products, IACA have calculated the GPV per ton TDN produced at Rs 186. The total GPV from animal husbandry by geographic regions is given in Table 4.8. TABLE 4.8 Present Gross Production Value from Animal Husbandry (Rs million) Bari Doab 682 Rechna- Doab 490 Chaj Doab 236 Sutlej and Panjnad Left Bank 226 Thal and Indus Right Bank 189 Peshawar and Swat 74 Sind 454 2,351 By comparison with Table 4.9 it will be seen that the gross production value of animal products on the Plains is at present about 35 percent of the total gross production value from agriculture. (e) Gross Production Values from Agriculture The total gross production value from agriculture by regions is given in Table 4.9. TABLE 4.9 Present Total Regional Gross Production Value from Agriculture (Rs. million) Bari Doab 1,677 Rechna Doab 1,409 Chaj Doab 609 Sutlej and Panjnad Left Bank 744 Thal and Indus Right Bank 449 Peshawar and Swat 307 Sind 1,575 6,770 4.17 (f) Prices The farm prices used by IACA in their study of the present and future are recorded in Table 4.1Q. TABLE 4.10. Present and Future Farm Prices (Rupees per maund) Wheat 13.- Rice fine (unhusked) 1965 17.- 1975,1985,2700 14,65 Rice coarse ( " ) 1965 10.50 1975,1985,2000 8.65s Coarse grains 11.- Gram 14.25 Pulses 21.- Groundnuts 25.- Oilseeds 23.50 Seed cotton 30.- Tobacco 80.- Gur 18.- Vegetables 11.- Fruit 11.- Other crops 21.- Milk 16.50 Meat 1965 62.- 1975 75-- 1985 84.- 2000 94.- Eggs 12.- (per hundred) Hides 6.- (per hide) Skins 2.- (per piece) Wool 83.- Offals, fat, bones 10 percent of meat value These prices have been used to determine the production value of water given in Section 4.3(J) of this Chapter. (g) Agricultural Development Potentialities (i) Productive capacity of the land The soils of the Indus Plains are derived from unconsolidated highly stratified alluvial sediments laid down by the Indus and its tributaries. In general the topography is favourable for irrigation but the levelling of individual fields is often poorly done by the farmers. The texture of the soils varies from loams to silty clays. A dominant feature is the generally high silt content. 4.18 The sand fractions are mostly of very fine particle size and thus soils with unfavourable coarse texture are not widespread. Textures are heavier towards the downstream part of each doab and soils in Sind are slightly heavier in texture than those in the Punjab. Soil structure is weakly developed on the top layer and moderately developed in intermediate layers. This lack of top soil structure presents certain cultivation problems, notably in that the seed bed is liable to breakdown rapidly and form an inpermeable crust. Here mechanised cultivation may provide a solution. A most favourable characteristic of the Plain soils from the irrigation standpoint is that they all have good moisture retention capacities, even those of relatively light texture. In general terms IACA consider that the soils of the irrigated plains are physically a satisfactory medium for plant growth. The potential nutrient supplies in the soils are generally satisfactory with the exception of nitrogen and with the reservation that only a limited part of the potential phosphate is available to plant growth. Most crops respond well to nitrogenous fertilizers and favourable interaction of nitrogen with phosphate is recorded. To obtain high yields large applications of both fertilizers are needed. Over the Indus Plains salinity and alkalinity appear in many degrees and the greater part of saline soils are saline- alkali. The study of the Directorate of Land Reclamation indicated that about three quarters of the land in the plains is free from serious salinity and alkalinity, which may be an optimistic assessment. Even so the extent of salinity is clearly a major limitation to agricultural production. Salinity in its less acute form can be removed by simple leaching, a process which will go on without special measures under conditions of full delta watering with a suitable control of the watertable. The seriously affected areas will need special reclamation procedures. IACA's field studies, broadly in line with those of others, indicate that the main areas of this type of land can be reclaimed with applications of soil amendments, in particular gypsum and animal manure, in addition to leaching and watertable control. Thereafter prevention of the recurrence of salinity depends on adequate water applications to ensure that salts are not allowed to accumulate in the root zone of the crops and the provision of incremental rabi water from Tarbela can make an important contribution to this objective. 4.19 The internal drainage characteristics of the .soils are in general, favourable. In the presence of an adequate drainage system, waterlogging should present no real problem. Tubewell development will gradually eliminate the high groundwater tables that exist in substantial areas of the Plains. In order to alleviate rainfall flooding,provision for surface drainage is called for in the northern Punjab and in the southern part of Sind. Climatic conditions in the Plains allow for all year round growth of crops. Although in broad terms the climate is favourable to high yields it is not in all respects and in all places ideal. Summer temperatures are too high and winter temperatures too low for some crops. The mean annual rainfall ranges from less than four inches in parts of the Lower Indus Region to 50 inches in the most northern part of the Plains. Most of the rainfall occurs in the monsoon period of July to September when it provides an effective addition to irrigation supplies. (ii) Irrigation requirements One of the principal reasons for the present low yields is that crops, in the main, receive less than adequate water supplies per acre. The irrigation works in the Plains were designed for a low ratio of crops to the total culturable area (low cropping intensity) with the result thatfarmers have tended to grow greater acreage of crops than theavailable water can properly sustain and this applies particularly in rabi when river supplies are limited. IACA's estimatesof crop water requirements have been derived essentially by theoretical methods but adjustments have been applied as appropriate to take into accournt local experience and practices. IACA's projected growth of intensity and hence build up of irrigation water requirement are based on the assumption that eventually an average cropping intensity of 150 percent can be reached except in the non perennial areas in the Sind, where the average attainable intensity will be 95 percent (neglecting dubari and bosi crops), and the areas in the Peshawar and Swat region where 180 percent can be reached. Evapotranspiration (consumptive use) and rainfall play a dominant role in the assessment of the irrigation water requirements. In the northern areas of the Plains where rainfall is higher and temperatures lower the irrigation water requirements are substantially less than elsewhere. To 4.20 sustain for example 150 percent intensity, in the nortnern part of the Punjab the irrigation requirements are of the oirder of 1.5 acre ft/acre (CCA), in the central part of 'he Plains it is about 5.0 acre ft/acre and in the hot dry areas of Sind it is as much as 5.75 acre ft/acre. There are marked differences between kharif and rabi water requirements the former being about one and a half times the latter over most of the Plains. (iii) Projected cropping patterns Cropping patterns, changing over time, have been projected by IACA for all canal commands taking into account the present crop distribution, climates, soil and other conditions, and demand. It is anticipated that the main crops will remain wheat, cotton, rice and fodder. In the cotton areas the position of cotton in the cropping pattern, being an export crop, depends to some degree on world demand and price. Climatic conditions will continue to dictate to a large extent the growing of fine rice in the north and cotton in the central and southern parts of the basin. As cropping intensities increase over time, the basic distribution of crops over the country will remain largely unchanged. Only for sugarcane is a shift anticipated to the potentially more promising frost free zone of Sind. In parts of Sind, notably Gudu and Sukkur right bank commands, it is felt that the best land use will be rice with non perennial water supplies. As an example Table 4.11 shows the basic pattern which IACA have developed for the reference year 2000 in the typical cotton areas of the Basin. TABLE 4.11 Projected Basic Cropping Pattern for the year 2000 Kharif Rabi Cotton 35% Wheat 3M, Maize 5% Oilseed & gram 5% Fodder 20% Fodder 15% Pulses 5% Maize 5% Sugarcane 5% Sugarcane 5% Fruit & Vegetables 5% Fruit & Vegetables 5% Green manure 10% 75% 75q 4.21 The change from the present cropping pattern to the projected ones will be greatly influenced by the water development. IACA have assumed that the prevailing subsistence farming will gradually develop into farming for profit from cash crops. Therefore the kharif : rabi intensity ratio will change with time. For the Punjab commands this ratio has been projected as follows :- Reference Year Kharif : rabi ratio 1965 1 : 1.2 1975 1 : 1.3 1985 1 : 1.2 2000 1 : 1.0 (b) Development of Agricultural Production (i) Influence of additional water supplies Agricultural production will be increased in the future by the supply of additional water and increasing application of other agricultural inputs such as fertilizers, pest control, improved seed and better crop varieties. Inputs such as land consolidation and agricultural services will have an indirect effect on production. The effect on production of increasing water supplies will be three-fold. In the first instance, increased water should be used to eliminate existing irregularities in supply. The effect on production cannot be quantitatively assessed, but assured water supplies will give rise to a situation in which economic returns through higher yields can be obtained, from additional agricultural inputs. Secondly the increase of regular supplies of water will enable farmers to increase their cropping intensities by bringing a larger area under cultivation. The increase in production will be nearly proportional to the increase in the supply of water. Further increases of water supply will enable farmers to apply full deltas to their crops on the increased cultivated area. This will lead not only to increased yields due to the reduction of both under-watering and the associated soil salinity, but also by creating the conditions of good response to additional agricultural inputs such as fertilizers and pest control. 4.22 (ii) Projected cropping intensities IACA have calculated for each canal command tne cropping intensities in the reference years 1975, 1985 and 2000, attainable under their proposed programme of development of water resources which includes surface storage and groundwater pumping and canal enlargement. The average intensities in the seven geographic regions in these reference years are presented in Table 4.12. TABLE 4.12 Cropping Intensities of Regions 1965 1975 1985 2000 Bari Doab 102 128 137 150 Rechna Doab 106 120 130 150 Chaj Doab 105 121 150 150 Sutlej and Panjnad Left Bank 92 108 113 150 Thal Doab and Indus Right Bank 64 87 130 150 Peshawar and Swat 135 132 154 172 Sind 97 108 124 148 The total increases in cropped acreage, over the 28.3 million acres given in Table 4.2, that will occur between the reference years is projected as follows :- 1975 over 1965 : 4.8 million acres 1985 over 1975 : 4.9 " 2000 over 1985 : 6.0 o " In Table 4.13 we present the changes in cropped acreage of the main crops over time. The main increase over the periods will be in cotton and fodder crops acreage, and in the minor crops fruit and vegetables. Wheat acreage shows a substantial increase in the first decade and a substantial part of this will result from the advent of Tarbela. The wheat acreage remains almost constant in the 10 years thereafter and decreases again towards 2000 as yields are further increased. The substantial increase in rabi fodder acreage is largely attributable to increased surface water supplies during the scarce water period. 4.23 TABLE 4.13 Incremental Cropped Acreage of Main Crops (Thousand acres) 1965 1975 over 1985 over 2000 over 1965 _ 1975 1985 Cotton 3,721 781 1,222 2,341 Coarse rice 2,843 -102 -573 305 Fine rice 682 205 194 210 Wheat 7,712 2,121 -33 -1,105 Sugarcane 1,206 5 98 202 Fruit 301 108 275 229 Vegetables 107 111 202 129 Khariffodder2,240 824 650 1,o60 Rabi fodder 2,745 630 352 456 (iii) Projected Yields As already stated present yields in general are low, for which irregular and inadequate water supplies, limited use of fertilizers and poor quality seed of low yielding varieties are mainly responsible. Differences in yields between areas are closely related to climate, high groundwater, salinity and standard offarming. IACA have projected yields for the individual canal commands. These projections have been derived by eliminating over time the constraints that cause the present low yields. The rate of elimination was based on recent agricultural development, government policies and judgement, as regards availability and absorption of inputs. Government policy to make the country self sufficient in food is well known. The introduction of Mexican wheat is being encouraged and is receiving high priority. After a reasonable input level for cash crops and wheat has been reached, fodder crops and maize will next receive more attention. Finally at a later stage other crops will benefit from input applications. The priority for the use of inputs is implicit in the yield trend curves shown in Figure 11. In IACA's calculations of production, the effects of underwatering and salinity from high groundwater in 1975 have been taken into account. 4.24 (iv) Projected crop production volumes and values IACA's estimates of cropped acreages and yield pro- jections result in the following productions and incremental productions in the Plains. TABLE 4.14 Production and Incremental Production in Indus Plains (Million tons) 1965 1975 1975 1985 1985 2000 2000 over over over _____ 1965 - 1975 1985 Kharif Crops Coarse rice 1.4 1.7 0.3 21%) 2.4 0.7(41%) 4.1 L7(71%) Fine rice o.4 0.7 0.3 75%) 1.3 0.6(85%) 2.1 c8 62%) Cotton 1.1 1.6 0.5 45%) 3.5 1.9(119/' 6.6 31(90%) Maize & Millets 0.7 0.7 - 1.4 007(100%l ) 2.3 c. 64%) Fodder 17.8 31.1 13.3(75%) 57.3 26.2(84%) 95.78. 67%) Rabi Crops Wheat 3.5 5.9 2.4(70%) 9.4 3.5(60%) 10.6 L2(13%) Fodder 45.2 64.7 19.5(43%6) 97.0 32.3(50%) 132.035.0(36%) Oilseeds 0.3 0.4 0.1(33%) 0.5 0.1 25%) 0.7 0AK40%) Gram 0.3 0.3 - 0.4 0.1 33%) 0.4 - Maize - 0.1 O.1(100%) o.6 0.5 400%) 1.2 06 100X) Perennial Crops Gur 1.5 1.8 0.3(20%) 3.1 1.3(72%) 4.8 1.7(55%) Fruit o.8 1.2 0.4(50%) 3.2 2.0(167%) 5.7 25(78%) Vegetables 0.5 1.2 0.7(40%) 3.0 1.8(150%) 4.9 19(63%) Minor crops are not included in Table 4.14. These figures show that according to our estimates the supply of additional water plus agricultural inputs will have a great effect on the production of wheat over the next twenty years and the production of the cash crops, cotton and perennial crops, will increase substantially after 1975. Fine rice however shows a major increase from 1965 onwards. Maize both in kharif and rabi, as a supplementary foodstuff to wheat, is expected to have its greatest increase after 1975. The production of kharif and rabi fodder shows a continuous rise from 1965 onwards. The gross production values by regions in the reference years are recorded in Table 4.15. 4.25 TABLE 4.15 Gross Production Value from Crops (Rs million) 1975 1985 2000 Bari Doab 1,518 2,687 3,787 Rechna Doab 1,277 2,o88 3,110 Chaj Doab 539 982 1,301 Sutlej and Panjnad Left Bank 809 1,423 2,327 Thal Doab and Indus Right Bank 502 1,220 2,010 Peshawar and Swat 290 453 622 Sind 1,447 3,097 5,546 6,382 11,947 18,703 (v) Animal Husbandry The production of total digestible nutrients will increase substantially in coming decades and we expect the proportion which comes from fodder crops, as against crop residues and grazing, to increase. In addition the feeding of the future herds will com to include an increasing quantity of concentrates of which cotton and other oilseed cake will supply a large proportion. We expect farmers to increase their herds along with the availability of fodder and the increasing demand for milk and meat. We believe that mechanization of farm activities will extend gradually and in our projections we have assumed that the proportion of cropped acres that will be mechanised will reach a level of 10 percent in 1975, 25 percent in 1985 and 50 percent in 2000. This means that the number of draft animals w decrease accordingly and more fodder will become available to production animals resulting in larger production of milk, meat and animal by-products. The increase in output will not only depend on improved feeding and greater number of production animals but also on improved stock. We believe that the bovine cow will become of increasing importance and will gradually replace the buffalo as a milk producer. Table 4.16 summarises the milk and meat production in the regions in the reference years, as they are derived from our projected herds and fodder production. 4.26 TABLE 4.16 Milk and Meat Production for Human Consumption (Million tons) 1965 1975 1985 2000 milk meat milk meat milk meat milk meat Bari Doab 1.26 .08 1.96 .16 2.71 .25 4.o4 .48 Rechna Doab .91 .05 1.44 .12 1.88 .18 2.94 .35 Chaj Doab .44 .035 .67 .o6 1.o8 .lo 1.42 .17 Sutlej and Panjnad Left Bank .42 .035 .70 .06 1.06 .10 1.92 .23 Thal and Indus Right Bank .55 .02 .62 .o6 1.28 .12 1.90 .23 Peshawar and Swat .11 .01 .14 .02 .24 .03 .36 .05 Sind .82 .o6 1.o8 .12 2.01 .22 3.66 .51 4.33 .28 6.61 .60 10.26 1.oo 16.24 2.02 Taken with IACA's population proJections* these production levels give the following annual per capita consumptions:- milk 1965 113 kg meat 1965 7.0 kg 1975 133 kg 1975 12.1 kg 1985 157 kg 1985 15.15 kg 2000 175 kg 2000 21.7 kg For each reference year the value of production from the total animal population, in terms of milk, meat, wool, hair, skins, offals etc. and including poultry, has been calculated. In this exercise IACA have excluded the value of meat and by-products from work animals as this has been accounted for in the farm costs as a negative cost item. In this way IACA arrived at a total gross production value for production animals for the reference years in West Pakistan and by div-ding these values by the quantities of TDN available arrived at the GPV per ton of TDN (Rs 217 by 1975; Rs 250 by 1985; Rs 135 by 2000), which values have been used for assessing the total gross production value per region of animal husbandry. * Calculations have been based on the assumption that three quarters of the population of West Pakistan will live in the irrigated areas. 4.27 These values are presented in Table 4.17. TABLE 4.17 Gross Production Values from Animal Husbandry (Rs million) 1975 1985 2000 Bari Doab 1,232 1,837 3,240 Rechna Doab 907 1,278 2,357 Chaj Doab 423 730 1,141 Sutlej and Panjnad Left Bank 443 722 1,535 Thal and Indus Right Bank 390 866 1,523 Peshawar and Swat 94 169 312 Sind 720 1,439 3,149 4,209 7,041 13,257 Animal husbandry's contribution to total agricultural production will be very substantial. For the whole Indus Basin the share of GPV from animal husbandry in total GPV from agriculture amounts to 40 percent in 1975, to 37 percent in 1985 and 41 percent in 2000. The figures vary for the regions. (i) Contribution of Tarbela to Growth of Agricultural Production We have attempted, with the assistance of our agricultural associates, to make an assessment of the incremental production volume attributable to the Tarbela project for the reference year 1985. It is not possible to arrive at more than an approximate estimate owing to the impossibility of allocating correctly the incremental water deliveries to rabi and kharif crops during the periods when the cropping seasons overlap. We are however able to show that of the total incremental rabi surface water to be made available in the IACA programme over the period 1965-85 Tarbela will by 1985 contribute almost one quarter. In terms of crop production volumes the main 4.28 impact of the incremental Tarbela water will be on wheat and fodder output. The approximate quantity of wheat attributable to Tarbela may reach about 14 million tons a year by 1985 out of a total production in that year of about 91 million tons. By the same year Tarbela may contribute about 7 percent and 9 percent respectively to the total production of milk and meat in West Pakistan. These estimates of production volumes have not been used in the evaluation which, as explained in the next sub-section, is based on the net production value per acre foot of water. (J) Net Production Value per acre foot of Tarbela Water In order to derive the net production value of agriculture attributable to Tarbela it was necessary to choose an approach consonant with the approach adopted (and explained in Chapter 4.1) in deriving the quantity of Tarbela water used at the watercourses in the various parts of the Indus Basin. It was necessary to derive net production values per acre foot at the watercourse for each reference year both for incremental surface water during the scarce water months of the rabi season and for the associated incremental recharge to the groundwater aquifer. The value of the incremental surface water during the scarce water months was derived from the production value of the rabi crops; they being the dominant crops during the scarce water months. The scarce water months, which are described in detail in Section 4.2b (iii), were taken as November to March in 1975, November to April in 1985, and October to May in 2000. The NPV of rabi crops has been calculated by taking the GPV of the marketable crops and adding an allowance for animal husbandry, based on 50 percent of the total annual GPV of animal husbandry. Although more feed is in fact produced by the rabi crops than by other crops this is partly off-set by the need to store fodder from rabi to kharif with consequent costs and storage losses. To convert GPV into NPV the average farm cost percentages for the whole of the cropping pattern as derived in the Comprehensive Report have been used. Since farming is considered as an integrated activity no separate farm costs have been calculated for rabi crops, kharif and perennial crops and animal husbandry. The NPV from the rabi crops was then considered to be entirely due to the water supplied to the rabi crops during the scarce water months, and the production value of scarce water (rupees per acre foot) was calculated. The assumption 4.29 underlying this approach is that a certain percentage reduction in availability of scarce water results in an equivalent percentage reduction in NPV from rabi crops; thus if no water is available at all in the scarce water period then no rabi crop will be produced. This is clearly only an approximation, since in practic the farmer can obtain some NPV during the months of scarcity by cropping on residual moisture. Also during these periods of scarcity, farmers will first allocate water to kharif and perennial crops, since, particularly in 1975 and 1985, the quantities of scarce water required are relatively small but nevertheless critical to the total value of these crops. The value of one acre foot of recharge water was calculated by dividing annual total NPV by total crop water requirement, sinc recharge water may be pumped, according to requirements, at any time during the year. These calculations were repeated for each canal command where incremental surface water, over historic supplies, is introduced (see Section 4.2), and the weighted average NPV's per acre foot of scarce rabi water and recharge water were derived for the basin as whole. This was done firstly for the reference years and then by interpolation for intermediate years. The values obtained are given in columns 7 and 10 of Table 5.4. These values are applied, in Chapter 5, to derive the total net benefits from agriculture. 4.4 POWER PROGRAMME WITH TARBELA (a) The Approach to Power Benefits In the evaluation of Tarbela in 1964 (Ref.4) the value attributed to power benefits discounted at 8 percent to 1965 was U.S. $81.2 million, which represented a contribution of power to total benefits of 10.4 percent. This figure was derived comparing the cost stream of the Tarbela power installation programme with an equivalent thermal alternative, an analysis carried out by the power consultants. In their comprehensive report (Ref.6) the power consultants regarded Tarbela as an integral part of the development programme and no separate evaluation of Tarbela power benefits was made. For the purpose of this present evaluation we have compared the load forecasts and power programme submitted in the recent comprehensive report with the earlier report in order to assess whether any proportional modification should be made to the power benefit as previously calculated. This method would seem to be Justified bearing in min( that the effect of a change in power benefits would be small in relation to the total benefits; a variation of ten percent in powe: benefits would only vary the total benefit by one percent. 4. o (b) Load Forecasts The power and energy load projection made in 1964 and 1966 are compared in Table 4.18. The load figures are broken down into the two main components - agricultural pumping and basic. The figures quoted for "1966" are those given by the power consultants in their recent report, the pumping loads being based on preliminary information supplied by IACA who later revised them to produce lower figures particularly in 1985 (see Section 4.4d below). Setting aside for the time being the IACA revisions, in both 1970 and 1975 the projections for peak demand in the later report are about 6 percent lower and energy requirements about 10 percent lower. The pumping loads though greater in the later study are more than offset by a reduction in basic load up to 1980, at which point the projections are close in the two reports. Beyond 1980 the trend has been reversed with an increased demand both for power and energy for 1985 in the 1966 report compared with the 1964 report. TABLE 4.18 Comparison of Power and Energy Load Projections in the 1964 and 1966 reports Peak Demand Energy (MW) (million KWh) 1964 1966 1964 1966 Basic Agric. Total Basic Agric. Total Basic Agric. Total Basic Agric.YetDl Pump- Pump- Pump- PLImp- ing ing ing ing )65 392 49 441 364 109 473 2,123 223 2,346 1,800 680 2,480 )70 680 250 93o 602 277 879 3,915 1,201 5,116 3,1001,467 4,567 )75 1058 484 1,542 881 561 1,442 6,239 2,274 8,513 4,6oo3,o44 7,644 )8o 1411 685 2,o96 1,440 781 2,221 8,399 3,245 11,644 7,0404,35711,397 )85 1 759 866 2,625 2,o80 976 3,05610,497 4,105 14,60210,2705,157 15,427i NOTE: In their comprehensive report the power consultants made an allowance for shutting down a proportion of wells each day to reduce peak demand. (c) The Programme of Power Installation In preparing the programme of power installation full consideration has been given to the economic advantage offered by interconnection from north to south. The links proposed are a 380 KV connection from Mari to Karachi in 1971 another from Mari to Lyallpur in 1973, Tarbela to Lyallpur in 1974 and further 4.31 lines from Mari to Lyallpur to Tarbela in 1977, 1982 and 1983, A connection between the north and south of the province permits thermal stations at Mari to supplement deficiencies in hydro electric capability in April, May and June and allows excess hydro power to be sent to Sukkur, Hyderabad and Karachi in July, August and September. The generation programme therefore reflects the development of load over the whole of West Pakistan and attempts to meet this load by thermal and hydro generation or interconnection in the most economic manner. The installation of units at Mangla and Tarbela is shown in Table 4.19 and it can be seen that the Tarbela units are installed sooner in the 1966 programme with Mangla units 7 and 8 being set back from 1975 to 1981. TABLE 4.19 Installation of Hydro-Electric Units 1975 - 1985 1964 Report 1966 Report Total Units Installed Total Units Installed Mangla Tarbela Mangla Tarbela 1975 8 1 6 2 1976 8 1 6 4 1977 8 2 6 6 1978 8 3 6 8 1979 8 4 6 8 1980 8 6 6 8 i981 8 8 8 8 1982 8 8 8 10 1983 8 10 8 12 1984 8 11 8 12 1985 8 12 8 12 (d) Tarbela Generating Capability The generating capability of the turbines at Tarbela varies considerably throughout the year, since they are directly dependant on the reservoir level. Their importance to the generation programme however is most significant at the time when the greatest demand exists for thermal capacity, which is during the period of lowest hydro capability. Table 4.20 tabulates the Tarbela generating capabilities during March - June, the period of minimum capability, derived both in 1964 and 1966. 4.32 TABLE 4.20 Tarbela Generating Capabilities 1980 Condition Mid Mar. Mid Apr. End Apr. Mid May End May Mid June Tarbela Capability Mw Mw Mw Mw Mw Mw 1966 Report 967 670 584 511 484 824 1964 Report 864 656 576 472 424 656 1966 Gain 103 14 8 39 60 168 1985 Condition Mid Mar. Mid Apr. End Apr. Mid May End May Mid June Tarbela Capability Mw Mw Mw Mw Mw Mw 1966 Report 1328 977 866 764 723 1217 1964 Report 1140 960 852 696 636 984 1966 Gain 188 17 14 68 87 233 The pat.tern of increased capability is similar in both reference years with the lowest gain at the end of April. A comparison of the power demand with the combined Mangla/Tarbela capability during this period of low hydro capability indicates the extent to which thermal power will be required to meet demand. We have accordingly taken the demand for the whole of West Pakistan during this period in 1985, made adjustments to the monthly peak demands for changes in agricultural pumping which were made subsequent to the power consultants report and derived the difference between demand and hydro capability. The results are summarised in Table 4.21. TABLE 4.21 Requirement for Thermal Capacity - 1985 (MW) March April May June Combined north and south power demand - mean year condition 4620 4831 4967 5033 Reduced Pumping (as a result of later information) 121 285 233 165 Revised demand 4499 4546 4734 4868 Combined Hydro Capability 1882 1344 1344 1798 Thermal Capacity required to meet demand 2617 3202 3390 3070 4.33 From Table 4.22 it can be seen that the month of highest thermal demand is in May, a month during which the capability of Tarbela is increased by between 7 and 10 percent. The increased capability is however small in April which is also a month of high thermal demand so it is not possible to give a precise statement of the increased capability of Tarbela. (e) Conclusions Compared with the earlier projections the load forecast for West Pakistan remains much the same. The schedule of installation of turbines at Tarbela is however more rapid and the generating capability is increased. We can therefore conclude that power benefits are at least higher than before. There are too many conflicting factors to permit a precise comparison. 'We consider that the power benefits will probably be 5 to 10 percent higher, but since the effect on the overall benefit would be small, we have assumed for the purpose of this evaluation of Tarbela that the power benefits will be unchanged. 4.34 CHAPTER 5 EVALUATION OF THE PROJECT 5.1 NPV FROM TARBELA In Chapter 4 we have described the methods adopted to derive the water-course use and the value per acre-foot both of Tarbela surface water and of the recharge resulting from it. These quantities are shown for each year in Table 5.4 together with the associated costs of pumping the usable and saline recharge from Tarbela surface water, and the canal enlargement costs attributable to Tarbela. The streams of NPV from Tarbela and associated costs were discounted to 1965 at 8, 12 and 15 percent to give the total present worth of agricultural benefits from Tarbela. These results are summarised in Table 5.1 together with the net production value per acre foot of Tarbela water at the reservoir. TABLE 5.1 Benefits from Tarbela (in Rupees million) at discount rates of 8 percent 12 percent 15 percent Gross benefits from: Surface water and valuable recharge water - total 3,767 1,793 1,092 Associated costs of: Recharge pumping 147 74 46 Saline drainage 190 83 48 Canal remodelling 38 16 9 Total 375 173 103 Net Benefits 3,392 1,620 989 Total storage water available at reservoir (MAF) discounted to 1.1.65 41 20 13 NPV per AF at Tarbela (Rupees) 83 81 76 It should be noted that the benefits obtained assume that a full supporting programme of agricultural inputs is implemented, otherwise the increase in production will be less and the benefits of the project will be reduced. 5.1 5.2 POWER BENEFITS For the reasons stated in Section 4.4, the power benefits used in this evaluation are those contained in Part I, Annex III of the IBRD Report on Tarbela, February 15th, 1965. These benefits and the savings in foreign exchange which would result from developing hydro-electric power at Tarbela as compared with a thermal power alternative are shown in Table 5.5. 5.3 COSTS OF TARBELA As stated in Chapter 3 the total investment* costs of con- structing Tarbela Dam are (U.S.$ 625 million) 2,976 million rupees of which (U.S.$ 390 million) 1,854 million rupees will be required in foreign exchange. A breakdown of these investment costs appears in Table 3.4. Annual operating and maintenance costs of 10.4 million rupees have been used. These costs have been discounted to 1965 at discotmt rates of 8, 12 and 15 percent and are set out in Table 5.6. A sunmary of these costs is shown in Table 5.2 below together with the cost per acre foot of Tarbela availability at the reservoir. TABLE 5.2 Costs of Tarbela and costs per acre foot of stored water present worth at 8% 12% 15% Cost of Tarbela: (Rs million) 1959 1572 1350 Cost of storage water at Reservoir: Cost of Tarbela (Rs million) 1959 1572 1350 Less power benefits " " 378 202 134 1581 1370 1216 Total storage available at reservoir discounted to 1/1/65 (MAF) 41 20 13 Cost per acre ft of storage water at reservoir (Rupees) 38.5 68.5 93.5 5.4 INTERNAL RATE OF RETURN A comparison of total agricultural and power benefits from Tarbela discounted to 1965 at 8, 12 and 15 percent, with total costs of Tarbela, similarly discounted, shows that the internal rate of return of the project is between 12 and 15 percent. By interpolation the rate of return was found to be 13.3 percent. The discounted streams of benefits and costs are shown in Table 5.7 and are summarised in Table 5.3 below. * 0 & M costs, customs duties, sales taxes and interest during construction are excluded from these costs. 5.2 TABLE 5.3 Present Worth (1965) of Tarbela Benefits and Costs (Rs million) 8 percent 12 percent 15 percent Agricultural NPV 3,392 1,620 989 Power benefits 378 202 134 Total benefits 3,770 1,822 1,123 Total costs 1,959 1,572 1,350 5.3 TABLE 5.4 NPV from Terbela Surfa,e Supplie,s 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Year Tarbela storage Basin storan'e require ent -. sn 3torri ,' ter 7arbe'a storcd .ater T_rhble storedh water NPV of water NPV from Tarbela available during additional to re.aire.l?nt at ;.vi.ilable at u ed at 'atercourse at ,Jatercourse at Wiatercourse scarce water period Mlanglq relacorimnt .atercoar3e atercaur3e during in acarce water period Rs/AF N.Rs. scarce water period MAP M1F MIAF MiAF 1975 5.00 5.00 2.67 2.67 2.67 135.0 360.45 1976 7.30 5.40 2.96 4.00 2.96 136.5 404.04 1977 7.27 5.80 3.24 4.06 3.24 130.0 447.12 1978 7.24 6.20 3.52 4.11 3.52 139.5 491.04 1979 7.23 6.60 3.80 4.16 3.80 141.0 535.80 1980 7.20 7.00 4.08 4.20 4.08 142.5 581.40 1981 7.15 7.40 4.37 4.22 4.22 144.0 610.56 1982 7.11 7.80 4.65 4.24 4.24 145.5 614.50 1983, 7.09 8.20 4.92 4.25 4.25 147.0 623.50 1984 7.06 8.60 5.20 4.27 4.27 148.5 631.50 1985 7.03 9.00 5.45 4.29 4.29 150.0 640.00 1986 6.91 4.19 4.19 152.0 636.88 1987 6.81 4.10 4.10 153.0 627.30 1988 6.75 4.04 4.04 154.0 622.16 1989 6.6' 3.95 3.95 155.0 612.25 1990 6.53 3.85 3.85 157.0 604.45 1991 6.48 3.80 3.eo 159.0 604.20 1992 *6.36 3.70 3.70 160.0 592.00 1993 6.24 3.61 3.61 162.0 584.82 1994 6.19 3.55 3.55 163.0 578.65 1995 6.07 3.46 3.46 164.0 567.44 1996 5.90 3.34 3.34 166.0 554.44 1997 5.80 3.26 3.26 167.0 554.42 1998 5.64 3.15 3.15 168.5 530.78 1999 5.46 3.02 3.02 169.0 510.38 2000 5.35 22.20 12.18 2.93 2.93 171.3 501.91 20('5 4.50 2.74 2.74 172.0 471.28 2010 3.65 2.23 2.23 173.0 385.79 2015 2.80 1.71 1.71 174.0 297.54 Table 5.4 Continued 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 22 NWV from Tarbela Recharge Associated Costs Total. Present Worth NPV from Tsrbela In 1965 Year Total Valuable NFV of Tarbela NWV of Valuable Total NWV from Total Costs Cost Of pumping Cost of Total NWV from P.14 P.W4. of the ?.W4. P.W4. of the P.W4. P.W. of NP'? fins recharge from recharge water Tarbela recharge Tarbela surface Pumping Tarbela saline recharge rmodelling Tarbela less Factor NWV from Factor NFV from Factor Tarbela M.Rs. Tarbela Rupees/AP M.Rls. pius rechwrge recharge attributable associated at 8% Tarbela at 12% Tarbela at 15% (15%) MAF M.Rs. M.Rs. M~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~.Rs. to Tarbela M.Rs. costs M.Rs. M.Ra.(8%) M.Rs.(12%) 1975 .347 96 33.31 393.76 20.91 4.36 .98 .367.51 .446 163.91 .304 111.72 .231 84.89 1976 .468 97 45.40 4J49.44 42.75 7.24 1.89 417.56 .413 172.45 .272 113.58 .201 83.93 1917 .589 98 57.72 504.84 24.41 10.77 2.80 472.46 .382 180.48 .243 ui4.8i .174 82.21 1978 .717 100 71.70 562.74 26.11 14.93 3.78 517.92 .354 183.34A .216 111.87 .152 78.72 1979 .841 102 85.78 621.58 27.61 19.96 4.69 569.32 .327 186.16 .194 110.45 .132 75.15 1980 .967 104 100.57 681.97 29.12 25.34 5.60 621.91 .304 188.84 .173 107.47 .114 70.90 1981 1.o86 106 115.12 725.68 30.61 31.67 6.51 656.86 .281 184.58 .154 101.16 .100 65.69 1982 1.255 108 135.54 750.04 32.31 38.46 7.42 661.85 .260 172.08 .137 90.67 .087 57.58 1983 1.324 111 146.96 770.46 32.57 44.2,7 8.33 685.29 .241 165.15 .123 84.29 .075 51.40 1984 1.428 114 162.79 794.29 31.95 49.02 8.47 704.85 .223 157.18 .110 77.53 .066 46.42 1985 1.501 117 175.62 815.62 31.39 53.42 8.68 722.13 .206 146.76 .098 70.77 .057 41.16 1986 1.518 122 185.20 822.08 30.78 53.75 8.82 728.73 .192 139.93 .088 64.13 .049 31.71 1987 1.524 126 192.02 819.32 29.95 53.93 8.96 726.48 .177 128.59 .078 56.67 .04.4 31.97 1988 1.510 129 194.79 816.95 29.05 53.87 9.10 724.93 .164 118.69 .070 50.75 .037 26.82 1989 1.492 132 196.94 809.19 28.1,2 53.68 9.31 718.08 .151 108.43 .062 44.52 .033 23.70 1990 1.478 134 198.05 802.5o 27.39 53.33 9.45 712.33 .141 100.44 .055 39.18 .028 19.95 1991 1.443 136 196.25 800.45 26.40 52.78 9.59 711.68 .130 92.52 .050 35.58 .025 17.79 1992 1.401 139 194.74 786.74 25.58 52.24 9.73 699.19 .120 83.92 .04-4 .30.72 .021 14.68 1993 1.373 141 193.59 778.41 ?4.60 51.75 9.87 692.19 .111 76.83 .040 27.69 .019 13.15 1994 1.339 143 191.48 770.13 23.78 50.95 10.01 685.39 .103 70.60 .035 23.99 .016 10.97 1995 1,300 145 188.50 755.94 22.78 50.13 10.15 676.88 .095 63.92 .031 20.86 .014 9.42 1996 1.256 147 184.63 739.07 21.93i 48.99 10.29 657.86 .089 58.55 .028 18.42 .012 7.89 1997 1.216 149 181.i8 725.60 21.09 47.94 10.50 646.07 .082 52.98 .026 i6.60 .009 5.81 1998 1.177 150 176.54 707.33 20.26 46.86 10.64 629.57 .076 47.85 .023 14.48 .008 5.04 1999 1.138 151 17i.84 682.22 19.76 45.86 10.78 605.82 .0D70 42.41 .020 12.12 .007 4.24 -O 1.999 152 167.05 668.96 18.93 45.95 10.92 593.16 .065 38.56 .018 l0.68 .007 4.15 2005 .9,24 155 143.22 614.5o 16.04 38.64 9.10 550. 72 .060 143.19 .065 35.80 .022 12.67 2010 .749 157 117.59 503.38 12.80 31.3 4 7.70 451.54 .171 79.92 .037 16.71 .011 4.97 2~015 .575 159 91.43 388.97 9.73 24.04 5.90 349.3o .121 47.27 .021 7.33 .005 1.70 3392.74 1620.79 988.78 TABIL 5.5 Fs- Fr .r \Acts Co'rlrtson of T"or.71 r ' cots ditt rarbela .tro ^r^ r osts in Httilon ibip-es 1 7 3 4 S T' Thorrsl rpneratin 7-rbl1,t IH-dro ,e-er^tion Tarbt1r PFoer 7enefits Foreirn 7xcbp" ;avi.Z s Total Crqts FI'- E^-gT -h.ZFA Totr'. 0o"ts Forqi-n Zvl¾nre Col.2 -Col.4 Col., - ol5. 19?70 _ _ s3.13 2.17 - S.1S - :.17 loll1 - - .71 43.4n - 62.71 -1?.48 17'? - - 39.4? 27.33 - 39.J2 -27.33 l 17 55.o? 17.e2 ,9.P0 4n.11 - 14.70 - 29 a02, 193.56 97.90 10.10 65.7? 11.40 t.-27 I07r3 '60.07 235.34 q9.67 5Li.1 260.40 17'.1n 117r 333.04 216.93 115.97 72.14 '17.07 141.70 1977 155.7, 6A.24 122.47 76.90 31.2S . I 1978 182.41 117.36 113.2? 86.10 49.19 '1.17 1979 148.94 92.17 12R.Pg P7.P5 20.JO; 4.7 1980 113.52 60.77 115.70 830.53 - 1.to -la ; 1rli 164.44 123.04 169.P6 145.5? - r.42 -. 1, 79.60 37.F9 71.R 538.s7 7._' 144.77 103.C6 13.7S 12.C- 131.04 l.02 I1 l1.33 20.67 31.56 23.93 29.77 _ 3.-f l. 7.4F) 4.62 4.P4 .87 42.64 3. 58.41 - 4.79 - 53.62 1za7 -m9.02 - 5.59 - >.?l 1n 0 59.17 _ 6.39 - S?.78 4 .A9 70.39 - 7.29 - 53.10 1 ?^ 62.10 - 8.19 - 53.91 1:91 64.13 - 9.1a - 55.Q4 1A'2 64.13 - 14.19 - 49.94 64.13 - 18.99 - 45.14 6.1.13 - ^3.79 - 40.34 1-. i3 14.13 - , r.49 - 35.64 !?,I, r4.13 - 33.17 _ ?0.96 7 C: ? 4.13 - '7r.39 - 27.74 lion -1.13 '2.0n9 - 42.04 1°?' 64.13 - 2-.09 - 4?.r4 C ~ ;t.13 _ .22.09 42.04 Mfl f4.13 - 22.09 - 42.04 -C', 44.1S ?2.09 - 42.e4 ^"3 '4.13 - 22.09 - 47.04 '714 01.13 - 22.09 _ 47.04 Ne0 :.13 - ?2.09 - 42.C4 .-200 *;4.13 - 2?.f9 _ 42.04 20'7 C.13 - 7'.C9 - 47.04 6Q*1- - 22.09 - 46.r4 .Oi!? 6.53 - 2.( 9 - fi.44 C 1Q 122.0' - '*.0a _ 1 7.01 t11 1."-.3 - ' - 123.14 l . S - 2.03 - 5'*.64 t 1 s !@1t _ ~ ~ Z2X9 _ 4:.r4 '' 9f q.?7 - 26.09 4 47.Q4 - l .. 7s _ <4.?a r,f0.20 _Z'0.44732. 6 TABLE .5.A.. Costs of Tarbela Dam discounted to 1965 at 8, 12 and 15 percent Mlillion Rupees Year Construction Operation Total Prerent Present Present Present Present Present Costs and Costs W!orth Worth Worth Worth Worth Worth Capital Naintenance Factor at Factor at Factor at Costs _ . "3te ° 1Z. 1 2 15% 15/%c 1965 10.00 10.O0 .962 9.62 .945 9.45 .933 9.33 6 65.69 65.69 ,892 58.59 .845 55.50 .812 53.34 7 78.06 78.06 .825 64.35 .753 58.78 .705 55.03 8 393.18 393.18 .764 300.39 .673 264 .61 .614 241.41 9 436.49 436.49 .707 308.60 .601 262.33 .534 233.09 70 428.40 428.40 .655 280.60 .536 229.62 .464 198.77 1 482.66 482.66 .607 292.97 .479 231.19 .403 194.51 2 433.16 10.38 443.54 .562 249.27 .428 186983 .351 155.68 3 368.42 10.38 378.80 520 196.97 .382 144.70 .305 115.53 4 223.72 10.38 234.10 .481 112.60 .341 79X82 .265 62.03 5 56.64 10.38 67.02 .446 29.89 .304 20.37 .231 15.48 Discount Discount Discount Stream Stream Streem factor factor factor 1975-2015 10.38 10.38 5.319 55.21 2.506 26.01 1.534 15.92 TOTAL 1959.06 1572.21 1350.12 TABL.E 5.7 Present Worth 1965 of Agricultural NFV. Power Benefits and Costs of Tarbela @ 8. 12 and 15 peroent ftn J4llllon Rupees) Year Totl NFV I Power Total Total Factor Total Total Factor Total TOtal Fato Ttl from Agriculture IBenefits Benefits Costs Benefits Costs Benefits Cotts Benefits 1065 --- 10.00 .962 9.62 .945 9.45 .933 1967 - - - 78.00 .825 64.35 .753 58.73 .705 1969 - - - 436.49 .707 308.60 .601 262.33 .534 1970 - - 3.13 - 3.13 428.40 .655 - 2.05 280.60 .536 - 1.62 229.62 .464 1.45 1971 - ~~~~~~~~-62.71 -62.71 48.6 .0 80 9.97 .479 -2.9 231.19 .403 -25.23 1972 - -39.42 -39.42 443.54 .562 - 22.15 249.27 .4288 16.57 189.83 .351 -13.84 1973 - -14.79 -14.79 378.80 .520 - 7.69 196.97 .382 - 5.65 144.70 .305 4.51 1974 - 91.40 91.40 234.10 .481 43.91 112.60 .341 31.17 79.82 .265 24.22 1975 367.51 260.40 627.91 67.02 .446 280.05 29.89 .304 190.88 20.37 .231 145.05 1976 417.56 217.07 634.63 .413 262.10 .272 172.62 .201 127.56 1977 472 46 33.25 505.71 .382 193.18 .243 122.89 .174 87.99 1978 517.92 49.19 567.11 .354 200.76 .216 122.50 .152 86.20 1979 569.32 20.05 589.37 .317 192.72 .194 114.34 .132 77.80 1980 621.91 i .68 620.23 .304 188.55 .173 107.30 .114 70.71 1981 656.86 -5.42 651.44 .281 183.05 .154 100.32 .100 65.14 19-82 661.85 7.92 669.77 .260 174.14 .137 91.76 .087 58.27 11 3 685.29 131.04 816.33 .241 196.74 .123 100.41 .075 61.22 1C.74 704.85 29.77 734.62 .223 16_3.82 .110 8e.81 .o66 48.48 !F5 722.13 52.64 774.7,7 .206 159.60 .098 75.93 .057 44.16 1996 728.73 53.62 782.35 .192 150.21 .o88 68.85 .049 3B.3, 1987 726.48 53.23 779.71 .177 138.01 .078 60.82 .044 34.30 19988 724.93 52.78 777.71 .164 127.54 .070 54.43 .037 28.78 !9'19 718.08 53.10 771.18 .151 116.48 .062 47.81 .033 25.48 1270 712.33 53.91 766.24 .141 108.04 .055 42.14 .028 21.45 1911 711.68 55.94 767.62 10.38 .130 99.79 55.21 C .050 38.38 26.01 * .0'25 19.19 110,2 699.19 49.94 749.13 .120 69.90 .044 32.96 .021 15.73 -13 692.19 45.14 737.33 .11l 81.84 .040 29.49 .019 14.00 1-9.? 6F53 40.34 725.73 .103 74.75 .035 25.40 .016 11.61 19195 672.88 35.64 708.52 .095 67.31 .031 231.96 .014 9.92 1996 657.86 30.96 688.82 .089 61.30 .028 19.29 .012 8.27 119' 646.o7 27 74 673.8l .082 55.25 .o26 17.52 .009 6.06 19S 629.571 42.04 671.97 .076 51.07 .023 15.45 .008 5.38 499 05.82 42.04 647.86 .070 45.35 .030 12.96 .007 4.54 593.16 42.04 635.20 .065 41.29 .018 11.4.3 .007 4.45 1001 584.67 4.4 626.71 .059 36.98 .016 10.03 .006 3.76 200C 976.18 42.04 618.22 .055 34.00 .014 8.66 .005 3.09 2-3 567.70 42. 04 609.74 .051 31.10 .012 7.32 .004 2.44 20o4 559.20 42.04 601.24 .047 28.26 .011 6.61 .004 2.40 2-D5 550.72 42.04 592.76 .0C43 25.49 .009 5.33 . 004 2.37 20086 530.68 42.04 572.92 .039 22.34 .009 5.16 .003 1.72~ 2007 51i.04 42. 04 553.08 .0.36 19.91 .008 4.42 .003 1.66 2008 )191.21 46.04 537.25 .035 18.80 .008 4.30 .002 1.07 2009 471..38 64.44 535.82 .031 16.61 .006 3.21 .002 1.07 2010 451.54 127.94 579.48 .029 16.80 .005 2.89 .002 1.16 2011 431.09 123.14 554.23 .027 14.96 .005 2.77 .002 1.11 2012 41o.64 55.64 468.28 .025 11.66 .004 1.87 .001 .47 2013 39o.16 42.04 432.20 .023 9.94 .004 1.73 .001 .43 2014 389 71 42.84 412.55 W.022 9.08 .031.4.001 .41 2015 349.30 50.04 399.34 .020 7.99 . 003 1.20 .001 .4o 3770.28 1959.06 1822.32 1572.21 1122.75 10.38 M.Rs. maJtiplied by strem factors 5.319, 2.506, and 1.534 @ 8%. 120 and lS" respectively CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS 1. We confirm that the Tarbela project is technically feasible on the basis of the plans that have now been drawn up by WAPDA and their Consultants. It seems however no longer feasible to complete the construction in time to permit full impounding of water (8.6 MAF) by the originally proposed date of 1974. Partial impounding could be achieved by that date and full impounding by the following year. 2. The return on the Tarbela project, considered Ps a separate component of a development plan for the Indus Plains, is 13.3 percent. This figure assumes,however, that a full supporting programme of agricultural inputs is implemented otherwise the increase in production will be less and the return on the project will be reduced. 3. There will be sufficient need and latent demand (5MAF) for additional rabi surface water, and potential demnnd for power, by the year 1975 to justify this as a target date for bringing the Tarbela reservoir into service. 4. The Tarbela project will make a major contribution to the projected incremental rabi crop production of the Indus Plains by regulating the natural river flows and by supplying additional water. Of the total future increment in rabi water deliveries to the farmers, from both ground and surface sources, Tarbela will by 1985 contribute almost one quarter. In terms of crop production volumes the main impact will be in wheat and fodder output. The approximate incremental quantity of wheat attributable to Tarbela may reach 1- million tons a year by 1985 out of a total production in that year of about 91 million tons. By the same year Tarbela may contribute about 7 percent and 9 percent respectively to the total production of milk and meat in West Pakistan. 5. The power benefits from the project are at least as favour- able as those derived in the 1964 study. They represent about one tenth of the agriculture benefits. 6. There are no alternative major surface projects or sequence of projects that appear to offer net advantages over the programme included in the Bank Consultant's comprehensive report - which embodies Tarbela for operation in the year 1975. 7. There is a degree of interdependence between the current programme of on-going and of early future irrigation works on the one hand and the Tarbela project on the other, Tarbela having for some time now formed part of Government planning. This is seen 6/1 in the newly developing areas along the main Indus stem and in the proposed Chasma-Jhelum and Taunsa-Panjnad Links which are designed to convey stored Indus water from west to east across the northern plains. IACA's programme of development also embodies Tarbela as a major component and without this project many aspects of IACA's plan would need to be revised including for example the priorities for tubewell projects and canal enlargement. 6/2 APPENDIX A TARBELA PROJECT STATISTICS The principal Project Statistics are as follows (a) Reservoir Retention level(1) 1,550 feet above MSL Drawdown level Design 1,300 Assumed for reservoir operation 1,332 " " " Storage volume: At elevation 1,550 ft. 11.1 MAF "1 it 1,332 ft. 2.5 MAF it "i 1,300 ft. 1.8 MAF Length of reservoir 48 miles Maximum width of reservoir (excluding Siran arm) 3 miles (b) Main Dam Type - Earth and rockfill with impervious cores; foundation seepage control by upstream impervious blanket and downstream relief wells Crest elevation 1,565 feet above MSL "I length 9,000 feet Maximum height 485 feet Sideslopes Upstream 1 in 2.65 Downstream 1 in 2 Volume 159 million cubic yds (c) Auxiliary Dam No. 1 Type - Earth and rockfill founded on alluvium with sloping impervious core and blanket extending to bedrock Crest elevation 1,565 feet above MSL Crest length 2,340 feet Maximum height 345 feet Side slopes Upstream 1 in 2.65 Downstream 1 in 2 Volume 18 million cubic yds. (d) Auxiliary Dam No.2 Type - Earth over rockfill founded on rock with impervious core to bedrock Crest elevation 1,565 feet Crest length- 860 feet Maximum height 225 feet Volume 1.7 million cubic yds (l) Structures are designed to permit a minimum drawdown level of 1300 ft. The study of the Bank's Consultants concluded that there was a case for limiting the drawdown to 1332 ft. and therefore this higher level has been used in the evaluation contained in this report. A.1 (e) Spillways Type - Two gated channels forming service and auxiliary spillways will be excavated in the rock on the left bank; they will be concrete lined from their crests to flip-buckets, the remaining length of the channels to the river being unlined. Crest level 1,492 feet above MSL Gates Service spillway - 7 No. 50 feet wide by 58 ft. hi§h Auxiliary " - 9 No. " it I It it Discharge capacity at full retention level Service Spillway - 615,000 cusecs Auxiliary " 795,000 " (f) Outlet Works Type - Four concrete lined tunnels, each 45 feet diameter up to gate structures. Tunnels 1, 2 and 3 steel lined downstream of gate structure, 43.5 feet diameter; tunnel 4 also steel lined downstream of gate structure, but 36 feet diameter. Tunnel No.1 would be equipped immediately with four power units followed by Tunnel No.2 and later by Tunnel No.3 to provide a total of 12 units. Tunnel No.4 will remain permanently an irrigation outlet. All tunnels can be used for river diversion during construction of the dam. Intake sill level (final construction stage) Tunnels 1 and 2 1,225 feet above MSL 3 and 4 1,160 " " (g) Power Plant Ultimate Installation - 12 turbine generator units, 4 each on tunnels 1, 2 and 3 Turbines - Francis type, to be designed for best efficiency at 333 ft. net head and to have guaranteed outputs at 376 ft. net head of 241,000 H.P. and at 417 ft. net head of 281,000 H.P. Generators - Rated 184,000 KVA at 0.95 power factor, but capable of 115 percent continuous overload. A.2 APPENDIX B IRRIGATION SYSTEM DISTRIBUTION ZONES In Chapter 4 of the report a brief outline was given of the distribution zones into which the irrigation system of the Indus Basin can be divided in relation to the various sources of surface water supply. In this Appendix a description of the distribution zones is given, including the main canals and links serving each area, and the proposed phasing of the relevant groundwater development projects. (i) Canals Supplied by Kabul and Swat Rivers Of the irrigated areas adjacent to the main stem of the Indus, those which are nearest to Tarbela are located in the Vale of Peshawar, as shown in Figure 10 of the report. They are however not commanded by the Indus and receive their supplies from the Kabul River and its tributary, the Swat. The culturable commanded areas (CCA's) of these commands are given in Table 4.1, and amount to 0.69 MAc. Surplus discharges from the Kabul River join the Indus below Tarbela at Attock and the combined flows enter the Indus plains downstream of the Kalabagh gorge. In the programme which we propose for the development of groundwater in the Basin, shown in Figure 2, public tubewell projects have been phased for construction in the zone in the period after 1985 in the case of Warsak High Level command, and between 1975 and 1985 in the remain- ing Kabul and Swat commands. As shown in Table 4.1 our projections indicate that a reduction in diversions of surface supplies may be possible during the storage release period in the Vale of Peshawar, and that consequently no indirect demand on Tarbela storage is envisaged from this area. (ii) Canals Supplied by Indus River Only Along the reach of the Indus between Kalabagh and the confluence above Gudu with the principal tributaries on the east,canal supplies will be diverted from the river at three headworks all of whichcan be supplied from the Indus main stem and Tarbela. The CCA of the canals in this distribution zone amounts to 5.27 MAc. Diversions will be made at Jinnah headworks from which Thal Command is fed, at Chasma headworks to supply Paharpur Canal and the Chasma-Jhelum (C-J) Link which commands Trimmu headworks on the Chenab, and at Taunsa headworks to feed D.G. Khan Canal, Muzaffargarh Canal and the Taunsa-Panjnad (T-P) Link which commands the Panjnad headworks. In the proposed groundwater development programme, public tubewell projects are phased for completion between 1975 and 1980 in the fresh groundwater areas of Thal, Paharpur and D.G. Khan canal commands, and by 1970 in the case of Muzaffargarh command, as shown in Figure 12. Our projections of the incremental use of surface supplies from storage shown in Table 4.1 indicate that in this distribution zone the increase in diversion requirements represents about 7 percent of the total increase in watercourse diversions throughout the Basin during the Tarbela release period in 1975. The proportion will ultimately reduce to about 2 percent, since only a slight increase in requirement is projected. B.1 (iii) Canals Supplied by Indus, Jhelum and Chanab Rivers A large part of the irrigated area of the Basin can be supplied jointly from the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab Rivers, as shown in Figures 9 and 10. In the northern part of this distribution zone, (i.e. in Punjab and Bahawalpur) the headworks at Trimmu, Sidhnai and Panjnad are served by these three rivers and by Tarbela and Mangla reservoirs. The CCA of this part of the zone amounts to 4.29 MAc. At Trimmu headworks on the Chenab River, surplus flows in the Chenab at Qadirabad and from the Jhelum and Mangla at Rasul together with supplies transferred from the Indus and Tarbela through the C-J Link will be diverted to meet the requirements of Rangpur Canal, Haveli Canal and the Trimmu-Sidhnai (T-S) Link. The T-S Link will provide the requirements arising at Sidhnai headworks, by transferring Chenab, Jhelum and/or Indus supplies from Trimmu to the Ravi river. At Sidhnai headworks the supplies received will be fed to the Sidhnai Canal and the Sidhnai-Mailsi-Bahawal (S-M-B) Link. The S-M-B Link will supply the lower portions of Pakpattan, Mailsi and Bahawal Canal commands, lying on the right bank of the Link. Surpluses, if any, at Trimmu will be passed downstream to Panjnad headworks and will if necessary be augmented by supplies transferred from the Indus through the T-P Link to the Panjnad river to meet the requirements of the Panjnad and Abbasia Canal commands. In the proposed development programme public tubewell projects in the fresh groundwater areas are phased for completion before 1970 in Rangpur and Haveli commands, by 1972 in Panjnad and Abbasia commands and in the non-perennial area of Sidhnai command, by 1974 in Bahawal command, by 1980 in Mailsi command and in the perennial area of Sidhnai command, and before 1985 in Pakpattan command. Of the total basin-wide incremental use at the water-course of release from storage during the scarce water period, the proportion attributable to the northern part of this distribution zone, is about 28 percent in 1975 reducing ultimately to 20 percent. This requirement is largely due to the projected increases in surface water requirements of Mailsi and Panjnad Canal commands. In the southern or Lower Indus part of this distribution zone the Indus, augmented by any surplus flows from the Jhelum and Chenab below Panjnad headworks, will supply the headworks at Gudu, Sukkur and Ghulam Mohammed. At Gudu headworks supplies will be diverted to feed Ghotki, Begari Sind, Desert and Pat Feeder commands. At Sukkur headworks, supplies will be fed to North West, Rice and Dadu canal commands on the right bank, and to Eastern Nara, Rohri, Khairpur East and West canal commands on the left bank. At Ghulam Mohammed headworks, the Kalri Baghar Feeder will be supplied on the right bank, and the Lined Channel, Pinyari and Fuleli Canal commands' will be fed on the left bank. The development CCA of the Lower Indus part of this distribution zone amounts to 8.98MAc. B.2 The fresh groundwater areas of the Khairpur commands are to be developed by a public tubewell project to be completed by 1967, while similar developments are proposed for completion in the northern part of Rohri command by 1971, Begari Sind in 1974, and in the southern part of Rohri and North West commands by 1976. The enlargement of canals is proposed in the Khairpur and Rohri commands by 1975 and 1980 respectively. In this distribution zone the projected increase in surface water requirements at the watercourse in the scarce water period of release from storage at Tarbela amounts to about 23 percent of the total increase throughout the Basin in 1975, rising ultimately to about 47 percent. The projected increase in requirements arises largely in Eastern Nara and Rohri commands. (iv) Canals Supplied by Jhelum River Only Under the distribution system existing at present or under construction, none of the remaining commands in Chaj, Rechna and Bari Doabs and on the left bank of the Sutlej can be fed directly by Indus supplies from Tarbela. Shortages which arise in these areas can however be alleviated by the provision of additional Indus supplies to areas below the T-S-M-B Link in substitution for supplies which would otherwise be provided from Mangla on the JJhelum or from the Chenab River, so that the latter supplies can be diverted for use further upstream. In the area commanded only by the Jhelum River and provided with regulated supplies from Mangla, the Upper Jhelum Canal will be fed from Mangla and the Lower Jhelum Canal will be supplied from Rasul headworks. In both these commands, which have a combined CCA of 2.04 MAc, the fresh groundwater areas will be developed by public tubewell projects to be completed by 1969. As a result of this development, our projections indicate that there may possibly be some reduction in surface water requirements during the reservoir storage release periods in this area. (g) Canals Supplied by Chenab and Jhelum Rivers A considerable area, amounting to 7.58 MAc CCA, can be commanded jointly by the Chenab and Jhelum Rivers and Mangla reservoir. This distribution zone covers the areas commanded by five headworks, at Khanki,Qadirabad, Balloki, Suleimanke and Islam. No significant increase in surface water requirements at the watercourse during the storage release period is projected in the case of the Lower Chenab Canal, commanded from Khanki and Qadirabad headworks, and in which a public tubewell project is proposed for completion before 1980. Likewise only insignificant increases are projected in the diversions required at Islam headworks for the small areas commanded by Qaim Canal and Bahawal Canal above the M-B Link. However, the projected increase in surface water require- ments during the scarce water period for the remainder of this distribution zone amounts to about 57 percent of the total increase required throughout the Basin in 1975 falling to 16 percent in 1985 and ultimately rising to about 28 percent. The projected increase B.) arises in the commands served in Bari Doab and on the left bank of the Sutlej from Balloki and Suleimanke headworks. Public tubewell projects are proposed for completion in Dipalpur command below the B-S Link and Fordwah-Sadiqia command before 1975, and in Lower Bari Doab and Pakpattan commands before 1985. (vi) Canals Supplies by Chenab River Only The remaining irrigated area, amounting to 2.52 MAc, will be supplied only from the Chenab River and fed from Marala headworks. It will be dependent upon run-of-river flows in the Chenab River since it cannot receive regulated flows from a reservoir. The canals supplied are the Upper Chenab Canal, the M-R Link and the B-R-B-D Link whilch feeds the upper part of the Dipalpur Canal in addition to the lower part of the former Central Bari Doab system. In this distribution zone, public tubewell projects are proposed to be largely completed by 1975 in all the commands served. The projected increase in the surface water requirements in this distribution zone during the scarce water period comprises about 17 percent of the total projected increase for the Basin in 1975 an' 1985, and ultimately reduces to 9 percent. B.4. APPENDIX C ALTERNATIVE SEQUENCES IIT RESERVOIR CONSTRUCTION C.l. Programme Adopted by Bank Consultants:- IACA in their comprehensive study estimated the quantities of water which should be stored during the kharif floods for release during the low rabi months at various stages of development. These IACA projections for stored water require- ments were discussed in Section 2.4 and are summarised in Table C.l. They relate to conditions of mean river inflow to the plains. TABLE C.1 Requirements for Stored Water with Mean River Flows (MAF) 1975 1985 2000 Upper (1) Lower (1) Limit Limit River Jhelum(2) 4.3 4.5 7.5 6.o River Indus(3) 5.0 8.8 19.0 15.5 (1) Upper and Lower Limits for year 2000 are related to the amount of canal enlargement and hence aquifer storage in the fresh groundwater zones at that time. (2) River Jhelum storage requirement is for canals which must be supplied by the Jhelum and Chenab Rivers and cannot be supplied directly from the Indus River and the C-J Link i.e. all commands above the T-S-M-B- Link. (3) River Indus storage requirement is the residual basin requirement after allowance for the River Jhelum-req-uirement above, and in 1975 relates to the requirement at Tarbela. A programme of surface storage development was adopted by Chas.T.Main (Ref.7) in order to meet the requirements for stored water. This_adqpted programme is shown in Figure 12 up to the year 2000, and the in-service years and live storage capacities of the reservoirs are shown in Table C.2. C.1 TABLE C.2 Adopted Programme for Surface Storage Project In-Service Year Initial Live Storage (MAF) Low Mangla(l) 1968 4.94(2) Chasma(l) 1972 0.51(3) Tarbela 1975 8.60 Sehwan-Manchar 1982 1.80 Raised Mangla 1986 3.55(4) Chotiari 1990 0.90 Kalabagh 1992 6.40 (1) On-going projects (2) Volume recoverable through main outlet works and power plant with drawdown level at elevation 1040 (neglects 0.3 MAF in Jari arm). (3) Usable capacity above normal barrage pond level is 0.29MAF. (4) Assuming adequate surplus kharif flows are available to fill the reservoir. In accordance with the terms of reference for the comprehensive study, the programme embodied Tarbela as the next major storage dam to be built after Low Mangla with a completion date of 1974. C.2 Alternative Programmes for Surface Storage Chas.T.Main's report has shown that there are only two sites for major surface storage reservoirs on the Indus main stem that can be completed at a reasonably early date. These are at Tarbela, where a reservoir having an initial capacity of 8.6 MAF and a considerable power potential could be in service by 1975; and at Kalabagh, where a reservoir having an initial capacity of 6.4 MAF and some power potential (but smaller than at Tarbela) could be in service by 1979. At Kalabagh, however, the nature of the dam site and the configuration of the reservoir are considered by Chas.T.Main to be conducive t sediment sluicing; this would considerably C.2 extend the usable life of the reservoir, but effectively eliminate its power potential, althoigh the initial capacity would be increased to, 8,0 MAF if the reservoir was operated without power production iii mind. A comparison of the two schemes with both operated for power shows a distinct advantage to Tarbela. Although the mean river flow at Kalabagh 97 MAF) is about 50 percent higher than that at Tarbela 66 MAF), the net head available at Tarbela (435 ft. with full reservoir, 217 ft. minimum) is about double that at Kalabagh (220 ft. with full reservoir, 120 ft. minimum). In addition the initial capacity at Tarbela is higher (8.6. MAF compared with 6.4 MAF) and the sedimentation rate is lower (Tarbela would reduce to'l MAF in about 50 years, but Kalabagh would reduce to 1 MAF in about 30 years). We conclude that Kalabagh can only be appraised as an alternative to Tarbela when operated for sediment sluicing. Chas.T.Main have assumed that in the event of Kalabagh being constructed before Tarbela, it would be operated for sediment sluicing until Tarbela was built, after which it would change to power. However, if Tarbela was introduced after Ka'Labagh in the 1990's the demands of irrigation during the flood season would be such that a considerable period would be required to fill both Kalabagh and Tarbela, with the result that one would have to remain at a low level during the months of June and July in order to fill the other. This would considerably reduce the firm power potential, and we have therefore assumed for the purposes of this report that Kalabagh would operate for sediment sluicing throughout its life, having no power benefit. Tarbela on the other hand would always be constructed with a power capability, whenever built. Chas.T.Main's report also draws attention to the relatively cheap but smaller amounts of storage to be obtained both from raising Mangla and from the Sehwan Manchar project in the Lower Indus Region. There now seems to be little doubt that, setting aside the small element of storage at Chasma, the most favourable opportunitiesfbr reservoir storage following low Mangla lie in four projects: The large Tarbela and Kalabagh projects (8.6 MAF and 8.o MAF respectively); the Mangla raising scheme (3.55 MAF); and the Sehwan-Manchar project (1.8 MAF). Either Tarbela or Kalabagh, in combination with the other two smaller schemes, in sequences which can be varied, will theoretically meet storage requirements up to 1990. C.3 In this section we examine the five possible alternative sequences shown in Table C.3 and show that none of these alternatives offers any clear advantage over the adopted programme shown in Table C.2. Under alternatives 1, 2 and 3 the construction of Tarbela would be deferred uilil 1978, 1980 and 1983 respectively, the timing of Sehwarn- Manchar and raised Mangla being revised accordingly to meet the storage demands. Under alternatives 2A and 3A Kalabagh (operated for sediment sluicing) takes the place occupied by Tarbela in Alternatives 2 and 3. It is not possible to substitute Kalabagh for Tarbela in the adopted programme or in alternative 1 since the earliest completion date for Kalabagh is 1979. TABLE C.3 Alternative Programmes for Surface Storage Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Sehwan-Manchar 1975 Raised Mangla 1972 Raised Mangla 1972 Tarbela 1978 Tarbela 1980 Raised Mangla 1975 Raised Mangla 1987 Sehwan-Manchar 1988 Tarbela 1983 Alternative 2A Alternative 3A Raised Mangla 1972 Raised Mangla 1972 Kalabagh 1980 Sehwan-Manchar 1975 Sehwan-Manchar 1988 Kalabagh 1983 C.3 Useful Storage of the Reservoirs For comparison of the adopted programme with the alternatives we consider the amount of stored water which would be both required and available under conditions of mean river flows and we refer to this as the useful storage. A requirement which cannot be satisfied represents a shortage whereas stored water which is not required under mean conditions represents a surplus for the purposes of the present analysis. The useful storage, additional to low Mangla and Chasma, and the shortages and surpluses are shown graphically for the adopted programme and the five alternatives in Figures 13 to 18 inclusive. The same demand for stored water is assumed in each of the programmes and, in order to simplify the calculations, this has been assumed to increase linearly from 3 MAF in 1970 to 9.3 MAF in 1975, 13.3 MAF in 1985 and 24 MAF in 2000. This approxi- mation sets aside the influence that a major reservoir has C.4 on the growth curve in stimulating its own demand, and it treats the demands of the Jhelum and main Indus commands as a whole, whereas this would not in practice be fully correct. The following rates of live storage depletion due to siltation have been used in our comparison of alternatives:- Mangla (0.02 MAF/Year until 1995 (0.o4 " " thereafter down to 1 MAF permanent storage Chasma 0 it Tarbela (0.12 " " for first 20 years (0.17 " " thereafter down to 1 MAF permanent storage Sehwan 0 " " Kalabagh 0.027 until reduced to 5.2 MAF, zero thereafter. The depletion rates for Mangla, Tarbela and Kalabagh are taken from Chas.T.Main's report while in the cases of Chasma and Sehwan it is assumed that the sediment would be largely removed by sluicing at the barrages. The estimation of the yield from raised Mangla presents certain difficulties since it depends on the availability of surplus kharif flows rather than on sedimentation. In the early years of development it should be possible to fill the reservoir (total live storage about 8.5 MAF) in most years, but there would be a deficiency in years of very low kharif flows. With full development the greater demand for irrigation supplies would result either in under-filling in most years or in kharif shortages in the canals. For the purpose of this comparison we have estimated that the yield from raised Mangla would decline uniformly from 8.0 MAF in 1970 (a hypothetical value as Mangla would not be raised until 1972 or later), to 6.5 MAF in 2000. C.4 Costs of Stored Water The economic costs of each of the projects under consideration are shown in Table C.4. C.5 TABLE C.4 Economic Costs of Projects Project Initial Live Capacity Economic Cost(1) (MAF) (million US $) Tarbela 8.6 625 Kalabagh 8.o 541 Raised Mangla 3.55 200 Sehwan-Manchar 1.8 221 (1) Excluding Pakistan taxes and duties, interest during construction, and (for Tarbela) the cost of power facilities. The costs of Tarbela and Kalabagh are abstracted from Chas.T.Main's report. That for Raised Mangla is a revised interim estimate made by Binnie and Partners since the completion of Chas.T.Main's report, which quoted a figure of 153.3 million U.S. dollars. For Sehwan-Manchar we have used the LIP estimate quoted in Chas.T.Main's report as a basis, but a contingency of 25 percent has been added, due to technical uncertainties, as follows:- LIP estimate for barrage and headworks: 542 million Rs. "1 "t it raising Manchar bunds: 67 " I 1? it " Sehwan-Nara feeder : 233 " I 842 " t 25% contingencies 210 " 1052 " = 221 million US $ LIP consider, that, owing to savings in remodelling costs of the Nara and Rohri canals as a result of the provision of the new Sehwan-Nara feeder, the amount of their estimate of 842 million rupees allocable to storage would be reduced to 130 million rupees. We have not taken this saving into account as we do not know whether the remodelling schemes are viable in themselves. The cost of the feeder has been included in our estimate because it is required if use is to be made of the water stored at Sehwan-Manchar. The cost streams have been discounted at 8 percent to 1st January 1965 for the adopted programme and each of the alternatives. Power benefits from Tarbela (it has been assumed that no power benefits derive from Kalabagh, the C.6 raising of Mangla or the Sehwan-Manchar scneine), also discounted at 8 percent to 1st January 1965, have then been deducted in order to obtain the net costs of stored water for irrigation. The power benefits have been calculated from the Bank Report figure of 81.2 million US $ (discounted at 8 percent to 1st January 1965, for Tarbela constructed by 1975), and then further discounted for periods of 3, 5, and 8 years for alternatives 1, 2 and 3 respectively. This is an approximation, as in practice the whole power programme prepared by Stone and Webster would be changed if Tarbela were to be delayed, but we consider that it is a reasonable one for a purely comparative study. The derived net costs of stored water for each of the programmes considered are shown in Table C.5. TABLE C.5 Net Cost of Stored Water (Million US $ discounted at 8 percent to 1st January 1965) Adopted Programme Alternative Programmes Economic Cost:- 1 2 3 2A 3A Tarbela 585 306 262 208 - _ Kalabagh - - - - 240 190 Raised Mangla 46 42 131 131 171 131 Sehwan-Manchar 72 122 45 122 45 122 503 470 438 461 416 443 Power Benefit:- 81 64 55 44 - - Net Cost 422 406 383 417 416 443 The quantities of stored water, surpluses and shortages, have also been discounted at 8 percent to 1st January 1965 so that the relative merits of the alternative programmes can be assessed. From these discounted figures we now derive the costs of an acre foot of useful storage shown in Table C.6 for each of the alternatives. The useful storage in this context is that part of the available stored water which would be required with mean river flows. The related costs provide direct comparisons between the alternatives. How- ever the surplus stored water would be of value at times of low river flows, and we therefore provide a further comparison of alternatives by also showing the costs per acre foot of C.7 total live storage in Table C.6. Finally the discounted shortages are also shown as they represent a measure of either the actual shortages or the additional pumping load, TABLE c.6 Discounted Costs of Stored Water (All figures discounted at 8 percent to 1st January 1965) Net Useful Total Cost/Acre ft. Cost/Acre ft. Shortage Cost.Storage Live Useful Total Live Storage Storage Storage (Million)(MAF) (MAF) $ $ (MAF) $ Adopted Programme 422 43.7 54.5 9.7 7.7 2.1 Alternative 1 406 41.3 50.0 9.9 8.1 5.3 2 583 45.6 53.1 8.8 7.2 3.6 3 417 45.6 53.9 9.2 7.7 2.2 2A 416 45.9 54.8 9.1 7.6 3.6 3A 443 47.4 55.2 9.4 8.o 2.2 It should be noted that while this treatment of alternatives has comparative value, none of the figures can be used for any one alternative in an absolute sense. C.5 Evaluation of Alternatives The figures in Table C.6 show that the costs per acre foot of stored water under the alternative programmes do not differ widely, being all within 10 percent of the adopted programme. However, the alternatives in which Kalabagh replaces Tarbela (2A and 3A) are more costly than the corresponding programmes (2 and 3 respectively) with Tarbela, and the shortages are the same; on this basis therefore Kalabagh would not seem to have any advantage over Tarbela as the first major storage reservoir on the main stem. Alternative 1 moreover is evidently inferior to the adopted programme, as the cost of useful storage is greater and the shortage more severe. C.8 Alternative 2 is superficially more attractive but it has the major disadvantage that there would be no storage reservoir on the main stem of the Indus until 1980 except for the relatively small storage at Chasma. Mangla Dam alone would be unable to compensate fully for the variations in natural riverflows of the whole system. Under alter- native 2 the irrigation system would therefore be notably more subject to uncertainties in canal deliveries before 1980 than would be the case with the adopted programme or to a lesser extent with the other alternatives. There mnight also be rather high losses in the Panjnad river if Mangla has to serve the Lower Indus region and in addition the shortages are greater than with the adopted programme. We conclude that Alternative 2 does not have any net advantage when compared to the adopted programme. Alternative 3 on the other hand does not suffer to the same extent from the disadvantages of Alternative 2. The cost of useful stored water under Alternative 3 compares favourably with that of the adopted programme and the discounted shortages are about the same. Sehwan-Manchar in conjunction with Chasma would provide a small amount of regulation of the Indus River flows but not on the scale that would become possible with Tarbela. Under this alternative the Tarbela project would be deferred by eight years and the lack of a large storage dam to control the waters of the Indus would be a disadvantage of increasing magnitude during this period. A further disadvantage of Alternative 3 is that without major storage on the main stem it would probably be necessary to extend the period of storage release at Sehwan- Manchar from the end of February to about the end of March, with consequently increased evaporation losses. Completion of Sehwan-Manchar storage and feeder by 1975 would be a difficult task, but a delay of say two years would detract only slightly from this alternative. Without the feeder Sehwan-Manchar storage would be almost valueless. We conclude that Alternative 3 is the most favourable of the possible alternatives to the adopted programme for surface storage development. A factor in assessing the adopted programme in relation to the three alternatives is the amount of surplus water at Tarbela in excess of the useful storage to meet requirements with mean river flows. We can foresee the following uses for this surplus storage which, while difficult to evaluate in economic terms, would nevertheless provide real benefits:- C.9 (i) To meet shortages caused by low river flows. (ii) To recharge the aquifer where it has been drawn down below the optimum level. (iii) To increase power production by holding up the reservoir level. (iv) For land reclamation where it is advantageous to carry this out in the rabi season. These uses of the surplus water have been given no value in this evaluation which has been based on the useful storage. However, the true cost of the stored water would lie somewhere between the useful and total live storage costs shown in Table C.6. The effect of the discounting procedure is such that the true cost of the adopted programme would appear to be slightly more favourable than the useful storage cost, in relation to the alternatives. Regulation of the rivers has been mentioned in the consideration of Alternatives 2 and 3, but has not been given any economic value in the present study. None the less, large scale storage on the Indus above the irrigated plains will have an important regulating effect enabling fluctuations in the combined flow of the Indus and Kabul, which can be considerable at present, to be reduced, and more effective control of the whole system can be obtained with such regulation on both the Jhelum and Indus than with a substantial amount of storage on the Jhelum alone. The requirements for regulation are illustrated on Figure 19; this shows, for the Indus cum Kabul a comparison of the mean combined river flows for the period October to April (when shortages are most likely to occur) with the mean irrigation requirement during 1975 to 1985 scaled down to give the same total flow for the period. It is evident that without storage designed to transfer water from the kharif to the rabi season, some storage is still necessary to regulate the flows available during the scarce water period into a desirable pattern for irrigation. The amount of this regulation averages 5.0 MAF, so that Sehwan plus Chasma are not sufficient. Figure 19 also shows actual river flows for the year 1940 to 1945; the large variations from year to year are apparent. We conclude that Alternative 3, the most favourable of the alternatives, shows a slight economic advantage over the adopted programme but that this is offset by the greater regulation of river flows and the benefit of surplus water C.10 water in the adopted programme. In view also of the planning and investigations which have now been completed on the adopted programme, there does not appear to be justification for the selection of alternative programmes of surface storage development. C.11 REFERENCES: (1) Irrigation and Agriculture Investigations Tarbela Project - November 1964 Sir Alexander Gibb & Partners, International Land Development Consultants N.V and Hunting Technical Services (IACA) (2) Electric Power Tarbela Study - December 1964 Stone and Webster Overseas Consultants Inc. (3) Dam Sites Tarbela Investigation - November 1964 Chas. T. Main International Inc. (4) Report on a Dam on the Indus at Tarbela February 15, 1965 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (5) Programme for the Development of Irrigation and Agriculture in West Pakistan May 1966 Sir Alexander Gibb & Partners, International Land Development Consultants N.V. and Hunting Technical Services (6) Programme for the Development of Power in West Pakistan May 1966 Stone and Webster Overseas Consultants Inc. (7) Programme for Development of Surface Water Storage in the Indus Basin and Elsewhere within West Pakistan August 1966 Chas. T. Main International Inc. (8) Sequential Analysis of a Programme for Irrigation and Power Development in West Pakistan September 1966 Sir Alexander Gibb & Partners (9) Lower Indus Report by Hunting Technical Services Ltd., and Sir Murdoch Macdonald and Partners - 1965. (10) Raising Chasma Barrage - Interim Note and Review October 1965 Chas. T. Main International Inc. Irrigation and Agricultural Consultants' Association Sir Alexander Gibb & Partners R.l. I N 0 v?Y - w w -J 4 cI 0 -y 4*) ~~ ~~ DESERT > Se-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CAiEU.-' )VA P PIN Ny;x -' K !. I DKN A) AtIA~IAL \~AKPATTAH A ESO Y A w Si A ELOW S.M\ BAHAWAL ABOVE+2j4F M.B.LINK a7lM I EXISTING PERENNIAL IRRIGATION. MAILSI AB0BV M.3.LINK M LIMKQ')i- EX ISTING NOW-PERENNIAL IRRIGATION. . l d o 7fo n hASTERN Si 86ose'd on mnformohlon pr-ovided by Iny'ohon Department. KTKUL RIVER OE SW JUI~~~ SHEIKHRA & INUNDATIO SA I-rn T R AA L 'K ' - 2 I H o °PISLAA8AD K, ~~~~~~'~~~~> ~, " S RA, ,,' o ~~RANGPUR ~~ eg [ I~~~~~~~OWER J14LElUM f.k DA. _"^> '~~~~~~~~~~~~, L>\ U t 1S LOWER CHENAb 'i >>g.AKPAT . iS 5 ' ',\ ^ , , * - M HARALA-RAVI . ^ < B>- *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~INK '^ o§ 41^ a > a t "'~~~~~V RALSuYPHLONK -< INDUS BASIN CANAL COMMANDS IN WEST PAKISTAN FIG. 1. PROPOSED BASIN WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME CANAL COMMAND OR PROJECT - PLAN YEA R I PLAN PERI OD CANAL______COMMAND________o____PROJECT_____ 1965/A 196r71967/8 1965/1/969/70 1970/i 197112 197ZJ3 1973/4 197415 19 75 -s80 9 O - 85 198 - 2 000 GROUAIDWATEAt CAIAL ENLAtRGEMENT AND IORiZOAUTAL (TILE) DRAAINAG DEVELOPMENT5 KABUL & SWAT UPPER SWAT LOWER SWAT, DOA8A A SHOLGAAA KABUL RIVER, JUI SIIEIKIHa INUANDArIOA WARS/AK HIGI LEVE'. L.& . BANA AI IND US rHAL L- 7-7 - PA H A RP UR HUZAF FFARGARH _ ,, .__ DG. K NAN INDUS, JqELLUJ& CHENAB (NORTHERN) RA NACPU R H A V EL I F=- 5 IDAA I ___- PAePATTANJ BELOW S-H LINK M4AILSI BELOW S-M LINK oAHAWAL 8ELtW M-8 LINX< PANJ AAD a ABBASIA INDUS, JUELUN a CUENAB (LOWER INMus) GAAOTKI SIN BECARIl SIND ! | tt t | i| E INDUS, JMELUM a CNENAB (LOWER INlDUS) |__ I - 1 1 I I I I I ! &HOTKI -I z BEGARI SIND t c _ ____ DESERT AND PAT _ _ - - - , AORTH WEST ___ RICE - DA DU KHAIRPUR wEsr KNAIRPUR FAST ROHRI AORTH 7- ROHRI SOUTH EASTERN NARA a NARA PUMP5 I ______ KALRI BAGHAR, OCHITO IS. e PUMPS |iit PfAJrAR; AND FULELI LINED CHANNEL 6AJA 4 F|7 TANADO BAGO I i w JHE*LUM1l Ili 1 UPPER JUELUM - - - - I |___;_____ LOWER JUELUM - I $ CHENAS & JHELUM i LOWER CHEiNAB 1 Ih=zz2-7 LOWER BARI DOAB | __I | DIPALPURe BELOW B-S INR FORDWA'l & E SADIQIA PAKPATTAN ABOVE S-M LINAk INC MAILSI A8OVE 5-M LINK _ _______|__ QAIM & BAUAWAL ABOVE M-B LINK H-RA LINI( UPPER CHENVAB RAVI srPHON - DIPALPUR LINAR 4 _ I I DIPA LPUR ABOVE B-S LINKj - -- - ____ _____ RESERVOIR. BARRAGE, LINk-CANAL AND MAIN DRAINAGE DEVELOPMENTS RESERVOIR. BARRAGE, LIAR-CANAL 1 I - I AMD MAIN DRAINA6E DEVELOPNENT5 - _ _ _ RESERVOIRS _ MANGLAL A__ R AS v ) TAR BELA _ _ KLA L ABAGNH r.-I.7. BARRAGES WITH STORAGE (HA SMA ES SEEHWANI- MANCHAR-CHOTrARI QADIRABAD PA S UL MARA LA LINK CANALS OADIRABAD- BALLOI(I LINK RASUL- OsADIRA8AD LIAIk BALLOKI- SULEIMANKE HI LINK .HAS/IA - JHELUM ELINK TAUNSA - PANJNAD LINK S SEINWAN- NARA FEE DER ADDITIONAL PUNJAB LINK DRAINAGE CHANNELS SUKH BEAS NALLAH LOWER IN DUS LEFT BANk OUTrFALL '_ LOWER INDUS RIGRT BANK OUTFA_LL IUSABLE GROUNDWATER WELLS C CANAL ENLARGEMENT SALINE GROUNDWATER WELLS .IORIZONTAL (TILE) DRAINAGE RESERVOIRS, BARRAGES, LINK CANALS AND DRAINAGE CHANNELS C) NOTE: I CANAL COMMANDS ARE GROUPED UNDER THEIR POTENTIAL SOURCOS OF RIVER SUPPLIES tP1 2 WELL DRILLING PERIODS ARE 5-HOWAN, AND TUBrVELLS WOULD BE OPERATIONAL ONE YEAA AFTER COMPLETION OF DRILL!NG 1- A~~~~~~~~A ItI ,- . TAn#~LA' A RN T I SIT + w WTTe ***0: Kc A> \S H N i R LOATO PLN 0 ScobS *'---S , SAXQ-* ) KARACHI ~~ ~ ~ ,, * ), e)/ '5- ; tIo~Orsa8sD l\LOCATION PLAN .' 6 ARACHI J . ' o ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~SCALE or MgLe5 <7>~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~ ;,~ ., A I/,.', I~~~~~~~~~I if t n' - ' \ ' < ,1 'f S . 3AUnD A1IOVdV9 (NV V3Wv / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I - 114Dl + | s § z b X w I .4 0.0 \-A Is 4 A I 10 A AND CAPACITY CURVES `7- 00 % PIP t 7 8 !A- L !;;s. -!wft ko \C 'ALO ",AD V .co 3 '110100 SCALE IM M'LES PESERVOIR OUTLINES SNOWN COORRESPOND TO FULL POOL LEVEL E, 1550' TO T.2 ASSUMED MINIMUM -OOL LEVEL EL 1300' TH DRAWINO -5 A REP40DUC T'Ot, I WIT. -440A CHANGES I DF TAtAS DRAWING 11 NI 130 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 ! ;. , s * * , s°w X X 4 A . . .>. s .!A* ~~ :- ,) '/r'm 0": ', ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~" .I _,nou ~W ~~~~~~ 2i~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .C Atm -~D TABLADMPRJC ; -~~~~~~~ ........ N.RSRSI ;O~~~~~~~~R STN IS .SM uc 16 FIGURE-4 ~~~~~~~~~u.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~f -3~~~~~~~~~~ EL 150',IIITO TE ASUMEI MN!MU POL '-YEL. EL130', OF TANS DTARALA DAM PROJEC RESERVOIRGUMAP IRRIGATION ---'--< / ~ .OUTLET V~ t>~\ < ( )POWER PLANT 12 -175 MW >i lX 05S) A , I',.-. .. * .. GENERATING UNITS / d~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ IRRIGA~TION I rI _a _ I ~ ~~SWITCMYARD- ---;Ž:i OUTLET~~~~~~~~~~~SAEINFE CHANNEL~~~~~~~ > , - --~~~~~~~~RI '-~~~~ ' -SE VIE SILWA 'N 4 \ //~kIIUXILIARY NL ~ ~ <<~~\ DAM- *~~~ ~ ~ UXIIAR AUXILIARYL DA'-SRIC SItiWY * I - DAM2 'p0 / (/~ 7)} , 7j9~~~~~~~~ lb 3k /¾~ ~ ~ P L A N 1000 0 1000 2000~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ ) \.\\-m~ f N,/y - .~~SAL I FE RIGATION JTLET PLANT w NG UNITS Ni' iNITSC) o > , - DiVERSION, POWER \ IRRIGATION TUNNF'LS GAT rr~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~FULL POOL EL.1550.0 ___ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~POWER .,MIN. POCLI 1 j INTAKE E.1300:0 -- 0- -< : \ 1 \ Axti- IVE SI N DIVERSION Ai ! \K: )i t_ #tXt1 I f - 1- GATIVOiVSIIO *~ ~ ~ ~~W EL 097 B\' 'I)lC e~~~' e u w ^ - -CdE3DIVERSIONDI E SO S *C [6i . * | il 't;--- ! . IVEPRSION COFFERDAM : . . .- - ..s \ I <+ iv(DIVERSION CHANNEL ~i .~. - i tll/(! ( W f '. .. X ,/ fg,/;l (iS /\fX II> A . X f / 11' r;\XX g - GATE Si 'i ) 1 Sr/ ) ;\\t FULL POOL EL 1550.0 I I (I., ~~~~~~~~MIN EOn L 1300.0' EL.11600 IRRIGATION 200 0 SCAL FULL POOL EL.1550 0 CRESr GATE SHAFT 175 MW GENERATING UNIT y POWER TUNNEL IDAIN IMPERVIOUS BLANI(ET : , - .,.- , -- RIVER ALLUVIUM SECTION OF MAIN EMBANKMENT a 11 ',HAFT FUL .\ g~~~~~~. 2 CONTROL GATES 16 WIDE x 24 _#st:;#s:#S ___..... l . .E} .... : b$tL&i g w,I EL.1 117.0 STILLING BASIN q EL, L1a. . RELEASE TUNNEL 0 200 400 CALE IN FEET BRIDGE a ROADWAY 1550 O' 7 GATES SO x 58 EL. 1427.50 /-IRAINING WALL ROCK ROCK 'I, EL. 1202.0' SERVICE SPILLWAY . BASE LINE MAIN EMBANKMENT 30.0' FULL POOL EL .1550. EL. 1565.0 1.8 ' / - 1. 7.... ROCK FILL - ROCK FILL Il I // I I R F RIP-RAP . 2.65 V - > \. ? EL 1430.0 I' .- .- ,, - - GRANULAR FILL MIN. POOL EL. 1300.0 .\ - RANDOM FILL . RIP-RAP GRANULAR FILL - *- -FILTER DRAIN 9 2 DRAINAGE BLANKETI ELlD IMPERVIOUS CORE IMPERVIOUS 8LANKET . RELIEF WELLS 8~ IMPERVIOUS BLANKET SOURCE OF DATA JANUARY , 1964 DRAWINGS - WEST PAKI t BRIDGE D ROADWAY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - TARBELA D. CONSULTING ENGINEEPS - IIPPETS - A STRATTON INTERNATIONAL CORP. I TAM' FULL POOL EL. I550.0' 9 GATES 50'x58' WEST PAKISTAN a LATER REVISIONS OTA CREST EL. !492.0' TRAINING WALL >rEL.122^.0 ~EL.1200'! SIN TARBELA DAM AUXILIARY SPILLWAY PLAN & SE INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRL CHAS. T. MAIN INTERNi BOSfON , MASS. U. S. A . EL. 1427.50 TlRAINING WALL 1'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 EL. 1202.0 ERVICE SPILLWAY B BASE LINE MAIN EMBANKMENT 300 o 6' FULL POOL EL.1550.0 EL.56SO I- 18 1.. 7.7 ROCK FILL . ROCK FILL \ .1 E -RAP 2.65 .-J . .. . - - GRANULAR FILL 2 ) \ a \ 2, , ~~~~~~~~~~R IP - RAP RANDOM FILL * 1R- __- FILTER DRAIN 'BLANKET -2I . .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~E.1 00 -> ^ . * I l o0.d>, d. . :0- .ORE IMPERVIOUS BLANKET r RELIEF WELLS kNKET SOURCE OF DATA JANUARY 1964 DRAWINGS - WEST PAKISTAN WATER R POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - TARBELA DAM PROJECT - 'AD WAY CONSULTING ENGINEEPS - TIPPETS - ABBETT - MC CARTHY - STRATTON INTERNATIONAL CORP. ( TAMS I - GHAZI , HAZARA DISTRICT, 50' 58' WEST PAKISTAN & LATER REVISIONS OBTAINED FROM TAMS, NYC. TRAINING WALL -!EL. 1200'! TARBELA DAM PROJECT Y SPILLWAY PLAN & SECTIONS INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION B DEVELOPMENT CHAS. T. MAIN INTERNATIONAL , INC. BOSrON , MASS. U. S. A. AUGUST 1966 FIGURE 5 |Loand conmonanded by Chenob 2iver. r= land commonded by Jh7el/um or Jhe/17um ond C7enahb R2vzrs WVAM SA Land commanded by /ndus or Indus, Jhe/um onnd Chenab lelvers. ,P4SFHA WAR ~wA~D |:Li: | Land commranded by Kabul or SWOf RIvers. i I SWAT ',A NK BARRG ARE . 14 6 - 2 < D ° 4 5 | ;: 8TARBELA S £~~~) AM. Ti 5° IN C L1 fHJ T5 GvP -Du -4 C~~~~~~uLAMS~~~~~~~~~ ~ DO2 "6LAt DAAM GtHULAM C ARG AMOHAM 1 ~G AI'ALA 4~~~~~~~~~4 J Al MARALA tUAJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ' > B S sA Q,J BARRAGE ~ ~ ~ ~ ,q C BRRG '~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~W 5UB > / u LINK RIVER AND LINK CANA L DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM. FIG. 9 /97/ Si/v /oion (inc/udinq / B.P Links) :............ rn ci rn WI i :ID ........ .4...,--UAi-RA ~~,,,4 .4 ",X' I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ AAA .BV ------.2 t .. M P LINK OAIM 4g NORTH ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ESR BEGARI ~ ~ ~ - 2Ag' hBV..\ . LE G E ND........ . ... .. . IRPURW~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\~~~~: -DSTESERTD 4 -+ -+ -SOUCA. O ^M N AZA......... ........ ....... .... .. , .. DEAS tslTu MOUbITA1115, i'XPOStO -aZDDoCK OR OeS[RT .,.' ' , . ' . ..~~~~~~~~~~~~.......... ........... .... ...(E OdA25UO ........................ .'.-;'; --X;_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~S I)~.x HN NpaTo A ....... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~PAK PATTA M--. LINK ... . . . BAHAWAL MEN' PEAN M 8 LINK O4AI M IS. AN LEGEND . ..... DWAHl 4--, 0-01k4, .v j.s.D K.$-SASSS, EASTER N S AD A4Q.A5 4444$J OU.TA44S. :P0SCO SEOIIOC. OA 04E000T 4.454.. CtM,A A 0CSUlDAQn........... - - - . - - (.44.5,. S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~S0E0 ~~~~~0SSSiAC..... .. ... .. 0R l..3U004JT N0 SASED ON SURVEY OF PAKISTAN MAPS. CANAL INFORtMATION BASED ON IRRIGATION OEPAR-ME4JT PLAfNSl b , h 5 r & N .. .. ..~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~..... HGLEVEIL--4- THAL ...~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~PSHi_A o 9 ) RA'. . LOWALRSWAT. \ *. .. _&DOABA A K A T A aNSHOLGARA ABOVE .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ST O 0 WA H ~~~~~A ERN SADI~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5AMS\~ . ..A . o. .( K .*ABUL*. RAIVE aSY ON- .......... ~~, U HIHv*+x.. ...............! 1 \INNA1N)''.......;..i H AVEN SPECIL HD AWS P A K S / o** z>>* *~~~~~~~~~~IRLEANE GlO O PRNES HUNTIN TAWCLPNDICA SEVCS "';~ ~ ~ ~~LNO LONDON*' R rAl4,OU R, ,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. . o....... .......... >.J., # _ LOWER C H ENAALCMMANDS - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _F G U UR E 0 F . L W E R x X C H EN AB .............................................................................,,. E R N S A D D I P K A A L A U- X R A V ISYPHON :::" . . D I P A L P U RB. 1.L1INNKK;.. .. IN4TERNATIONAL B§ANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT INDUS SPECIAL STUDY WEST PAKISTAN SIRALEXANCER GlIE &PARtNERS, HU}NTING TECHNICAL SERVICES, LTD., p I ~~~~~~~~A INTERNAT IONAL LAND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS, ARNHEM INDUS BASIN CANAL SYSTEM AND CANAL COMMANDS FIGURE 10 100 I I-I __I -- PERCEN'T 'OF' TIME 90------- - - 70 - 60 ziz~I 1 II7- -I-- INDU ATA TO K ---- 40 00or< _ _ _ _ __ _ _ | __ t_ /INDUS AT DARBAND'__ _ _ _ _ - __ _ _ 4__ _- . ---(DERI-VED FROM _ _ _ _ IO__ ~ ~ ' 2O - - - - - 2 X XNU ATND ATaC ro i - A- TI I l_____== ATTOCK AND DARBAND r-_FLOW.DURATIOL UORW HOUSAND ES 6 5 r 2 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ L O W S T H ~I I I _ _ _ _ _ 987 6 4 3 2 9 8 7 o 4 3 2 1000 100 10 FIGURE 6 13~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ D] _______ -____ l____ ____- { ---- Z 7~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Y 1 o*. 9' --- .0 s\ i __ ____ O~~ I- _____'., - _ 5 7<)S 2 2 0 3 4 5 5 -J~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~TS IN Y IR I~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~ I G N RE 5~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'5 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 TiME IN YEARS INTERNATION~AL SANE FOR RECODSTRUCTION * OEVELOPmEmr TARBELA DAM PROJECT PATTERN OF SEDIMENT DISPOSITION CHAS T M~A.N INYTRNATIDNA, II%JC 906VON . ..$SACflUCT,T. *S FEBRUARY , 966 F IGURE 8 ZZ |Land comrnanded by Chenob /Ziver. | oand cornmmanced by . uJhelum or Jhe/7 umand Che/7ob n RIvcrs. WARSA U AWNAR LE;', LX and comrnanded by Indus or- Induvs, Jhe//J'm and CAenab k?vr.,fv#RAE< 7" , t-.RHA WAR I'Z1 Land commanded by KAobul or Swat RQvers. C1 A AAH g AS~Mx A 814RAGf WA T 3 4 K BARRAGE Cl k I TE or -...~~~~~~. ~TARBELA ....~~~~~~~~~. ~~~D A Ml TAUNSA I RAI AA GE C D o BARRAGE GHVJLAM 4 AG MANGLA DAAI MOH,AM EA ARRA E~~~~~~~~~~~~~~BARG RIVER AND LINK CANAL DISTRIBUTION SY~STEM. FIG.A A /97/ Sitoa/-,on ~~/nc/udinq / 81? Links) : ( A-) 350 BASIC YIELD PROJECTIONS OF IRRIGATED CROPS. .- IN THE RICE AND COTTON AREAS OF THE PUNJAB / EXPRESSED AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE"1960"YIELD. / /. Cotoon projechon refers only to cotton area. 2 Rlce prolecl,uon refers on/l to rlce area. / 300 ~*3. Projections of o/her crops retfer to both areas / 4 '/960'"- average /959/1961 5 Projected ylelds based on full water sP pply. / / ~ 11 250 X / j,,>' -- /;7 IL. z I a u_ 0 200 +_9 2000_ I / ##~~'1,' ' 150 -.,i'§ YILD IN MA/SAR -- _ - rE S/VM U-SX ,.E /1/ /-2' g , / $$~~~~~/960" 2000 Cotton 68 OO/% 225 (3301/o6 / *' / . @- Sugarcane (gur) 28.0 100%Y 78.0 (260%) // } f / 0 -0- Whealt /18 /00% 35.0 (300%) // ,/ , / *---------- Rice (unhusked) 16.0 /00% 45.0 (280 v, / g ,.+ 8 . / --- Maize 11.5 100% 38.0 (330%) -, ;7/ ,- -0- Oilseeds/gram Z2 /00% 175 (240%) 0 ~~~~~~~(mlnor' crops) 20) 100- - I "1960" 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 YE AR S FIGURE 11 INDUS & JHELUM RIVERS COMBINED STORAGE PROGRAMME MA F] IACA Upper limit 2 5 - --__-_--+--------t----- - '--- -- -i-- - -- -__ i < I / IACA Lower /Iini/ 2C - -| --- ---- ~ ---- 1 -~- 2I R - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I I ,o _ _ - - - t- - - - _ _____ E y \ -t ~Storo9e &ear,cI in !- - ! u / 1 4e~~at of mean f/ow ' ct:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ C II i iI 00 =~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i,trg o'em n In. _ of Inean flo_ ___ NJ /965 1970 /975 /980 /985 '990 1995 2000 YEAR MAF Storage to be ir)fro u ece after Igq not coi siderecl 20- - lo- _T& , . . e Usefui onae Stcci4age S//// t y ?/ //4 7T / ,provIded byRalsedAf atngla, ///// 0- _ Changes 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2020 -n C: STORAGE PRO GRAMME -ALTER NAT IV E 3 0n 25 MAF MAF t ~~~~~~~~~~~~Sf'orage, 'o be /'7 ducedt 0z aft-er 199C, ' 'con leredl Assun ed storc?g demand 20 _ _ _ _ _ _ in me an yeawr I0~~~~~~~~~~I C, \Shortagegl// i Oct'ober ro April\/ow ./\ J D 3 2 Mean Flow 192Z- 63 Mean reqy4remenrt 3'0 MAP For requlaton. 0 I OCT NOV DEC TAN F EB MAR APR REQUIREMENTS FOR REGULATION ON INDUS CUM KABUL FIGURE 19 APPENDIX 2 Page 1 Assessment of Average Values Per Acre Foot of Incremental Water The value per unit of incremental water in tubewell project areas has been determined for each year as the total incremental net production value (NPV) over the total incremental water availability. The incremental NPV has been defined as the difference in NPV attainable "with" and "with- out" further water development. Within a given project area the average value per acre foot of incremental water thus takes account of the acreage expansion as well as the yield raising effects of additional water supplies under the prevailing conditions and their projected development. For purposes of the Tarbela evaluation the values determined in the above described manner were weighted by the amount of additional surface water absorbed in each tubewell project area and the weighted average value found for eleven project areas has thus been applied to the Tarbela quantities. While the Bank Group evaluated twelve tubewell pro- jects (see Part II of this Annex Volume) at the time of this evaluation the values for the Ravi Syphon Dipalpur project had not been available. However, as shown in Table 5, page 1 of the Ravi Syphon Project Review the values finally determined are so close to the weighted average for the eleven projects that its omission is inconsequential for the Tarbela evaluation. The attached table (page 3 of this Appendix) gives the range of values per incremental acre foot of water determined in project areas, the weighted average at watercourse head and the corresponding value at dam site. The latter is based on an assumed loss factor of an average 45 percent. The conversion from watercourse values to dam site values has been done to facilitate the extrapolation of benefits to the full availability from Tarbela at dam site. APPENDIX 2 Page 2 Average Values Per Acre Foot of Incremental Water As Determined on the Basis of Project Evaluations Weighted Weighted Average Values Average Values At WC At Dam At W/C At Dam Year Range of Values Head Site Year Range of Values Head Site ------------(Rs.) ----------- -----------(Rs.)----------- 1975 4.5 - 46.9 36.9 20.3 2001 94.6 - 160.1 122.7 67.5 1976 10.6 - 49.6 39.2 21.6 2002 96.5 - 163.3 125.2 68.9 1977 15.5 - 53.6 41.9 23.0 2003 98.4 - 166.6 127.7 70.2 1978 18.9 - 59.1 48.3 26.6 2004 100.4 - 169.9 130.3 71.7 1979 22.4 - 66.8 54.1 29.8 2005 102.4 - 173.3 132.9 73.1 1980 25.4 - 73.2 58.5 32.2 2006 104.4 - 176.8 135.6 74.6 1981 28.4 - 80.4 63.3 34.8 2007 106.5 - 180.3 138.3 76.1 1982 31.0 - 87.7 67.7 37.2 2008 108.6 - 183.9 141.1 77.6 1983 33.5 - 93.8 71.8 39.5 2009 110.8 - 187.6 143.9 79.1 1984 36.7 - 101.0 76.1 41.9 2010 113.0 - 191.4 146.8 80.7 1985 37.9 - 107.7 79.3 43.6 2011 115.3 - 195.2 149.7 82.3 1986 42.3 - 111.3 82.4 45.3 2012 117.6 - 199.1 152.7 84.0 1987 46.7 - 115.0 85.6 47.1 2013 120.0 - 203.1 155.8 85.7 1988 51.5 - 18.9 89.1 49.0 2014 122.4 - 207.2 158.9 87.4 1989 56.8 - 122.8 92.5 50.9 2015 124.8 - 211.3 162.1 89.2 1990 62.4 - 127.0 96.1 52.9 2016 127.3 - 215.5 165.3 90.9 1991 68.3 - 131.4 98.9 54.4 2017 129.8 - 219.8 168.6 92.7 1992 74.8 - 134.0 101.3 55.7 2018 132.4 - 224.2 172.0 94.6 1993 80.8 - 136.7 104.0 57.2 2019 135.0 - 228.7 l70.4 96.5 1994 82.4 - 139.0 106.8 58.7 2020 137.7 - 233.3 178.9 98.4 1995 84.0 - 142.2 108.9 59.9 2021 140.5 - 238.0 182.5 100.4 1996 85.7 - 145.0 111.1 61.1 2022 143.3 - 242.8 186.2 102.4 1997 87.4 - 147.9 113.3 62.3 2023 146.2 - 247.7 190.0 104.5 1998 89.1 - 150.9 115.6 63.6 2024 149.1 - 252.7 193.8 106.6 1999 90.9 - 153.9 117.9 64.8 2025 152.1 - 257.8 197.7 109.3 2000 92.7 - 157.0 120.3 66.2 2026 155.1 - 263.0 202.7 111.5 2027 158.2 - 268.3 206.7 113.7 ANNEX 4.1 TARBELA PROJE?TPg T Storage Availability and Benefits of Tarbela Deliveries As Estimated Under Varying Assumptione Evaluation Based on Average.Vasess Bank Groop 1965 Report Modified Consultant's 12f if of- Incremental Water in Project Areas2 Beeits Benefits of o Storage Value/ Total Value/ Scarce Tarbela B5t Storage Value/ Tarbala Net Avail- Acre Total Rabi Acre Rabi Deli- Recharge Total Avail- Acre Deli- Recharge Total T. bli Foot ./Benefits Quntty Benefits Foot Quantities varies Benefits Benefits abilit Foot veries Benefits Benefits hiT. flu.R ) W W .=f) TflTY , 71AFr rR(Ii, aun TfAPV lTfg TER l 1975 8.6 52 447 5.6 360 64 5.0 320 7.1 327.1 5.0 20.3 102 7.5 109.5 1976 8.5 58 491 8.2 404 49 7.3 358 13.5 371.5 8.6 21.6 i86 15.3 201.3 1977 8.3 6i 506 8.2 447 55 7.3 402 19.7 421.7 8.4 23.D 193 22.0 215.0 1978 8.2 68 554 8.i 491 61 7.2 439 26.9 465.9 8.2 26.6 218 30.2 248.2 1979 8.0 73 581 8.1 536 66 7.2 475 33.5 508.5 8.0 29.8 238 38.4 276.4. 1980 7.9 76 604 8.1 581 72 7.2 518 4o.5 558.5 7.9 32.2 254 46.7 300.7 1981 7.7 82 628 8.i 610 75 7.2 540 46.3 586.3 7.7 34.8 268 52.9 320.9 1982 7.6 85 649 8.0 615 77 7.1 547 57.4 604.4 7.6 37.2 283 67.3 350.3 1983 7.4 88 652 8.0 624 78 7.1 554 6i.8 615.8 7.4 39.5 292 73.8 350.3 1984 7.3 89 652 8.0 632 79 7.1 561 73.4 634.4 7.3 41.9 306 87.6 393.6 1985 7.1 92 656 7.9 640 Si 7.0 567 82.1 649.1 7.1 43.6 310 99.2 409.2 1986 7.0 94 66i 7.6 637 84 6.9 580 91.9 671.9 7.0 45.3 317 112.2 429.2 1987 6.8 97 662 7.5 627 84 6.8 571 99.2 670.2 6.8 47.1 320 120.8 440.8 1988 6.7 100 668 7.5 622 83 6.8 564 102.8 666.8 6.7 49.0 328 125.7 453.7 1989 6.6 102 671 7.4 612 83 6.7 556 105.8 661.8 6.6 50.9 336 129.3 465.3 1990 6.4 972 589 7.2 604 84 6.5 546 107.9 653.9 6.4 52.9 339 132.8 471.8 1991 6.3 93 586 7.2 604 84 6.5 546 107.7 653.7 6.3 54.4 343 131.8 474.8 1997 6.2 95 589 7.0 592 85 6.4 544 137.2 651.2 6.2 55.7 345 130.5 475.5 1993 6.0 97 582 6.8 585 86 6.2 533 107.4 640.4 6.o 57.2 343 130.5 473.5 1994 5.9 99 584 6.8 579 85 6.2 527 1o6.7 633.7 5.9 58.7 346 130.5 476.5 1995 5.7 100 570 6.7 567 85 6.1 519 105.4 624.4 5.7 59.9 341 127.0 468.0 1996 5.6 102 571 6.5 554 85 5.9 502 103.4 605.4 5.6 61.; 342 124.6 466.6 1997 5.4 104 562 6.4 554 87 5.8 505 101.7 606.7 5.4 62.3 336 123.4 459.4 1998 5.3 106 562 6.2 531 86 5.6 482 98.8 58o.8 5.3 63.6 337 119.8 456.8 1999 5.1 io8 551 6.i 510 84 5.5 462 95.4 557.4 5.1 64.8 330 115.0 445.0 2000 5.0 109 545 5.8 502 87 5.4 470 91.3 561.3 5.0 66.2 331 109.2 410.2 2001 4.8 111 533 5.6 496 89 5.2 463 - - 4.8 67.5 324 106.8 430.8 2002 4.7 113 534 5.4 490 91 5.0 455 - - 4.7 68.9 324 103.2 427.2 2003 4.5 115 518 5.2 484 93 4.8 446 - - 4.5 70.2 316 100.8 416.8 2004 4.4 uSa 519 4.9 478 98 4.6 451 - - 4.4 71.7 315 97.2 412.2 2005. 4.2 120 504 4.8 471 98 4.5 441 79.4 520.4 4.2 73.1 307 94.8 401.8 2006 4.1 122 500 4.6 454 99 4.3 426 - - 4.1 74.6 306 91.2 397.2 2007 3.9 124 484 4.5 437 97 4.2 407 -- 3.9 76.1 297 88.8 385.8 2008 3.8 126 479 4.3 420 98 4.0 392 -- 3.8 77.6 295 85.2 380.2 2009 3.6 129 464 4.2 403 96 3.9 374 - - 3.6 79.1 285 83.5 368.5 2010 3.5 131 459 4.0 386 97 3.7 359 65.8 424.8 3.5 80.7 282 79.2 361.2 2011 3.3 133 439 3.8 368 97 3.5 340 - - 3.3 82.3 272 76,8 348.8 2012 3.2 135 432 3.5 351 100 3.3 330 -- 3.2 84.0 269 73.2 342.2 2013 3.0 138 414 3.4 333 98 3.2 314 -- 3.0 85.7 257 70.2 327.2 2014 2.9 140 406 3.2 315 98 3.0 294 -- 2.9 87.4 253 66.0 319.0 2015 2.7 143 386 3.0 298 99 2.8 277 51.8 328.8 2.7 89.2 241 62.4 303.4 2016 2.6 145 377 2.8 278 99 2.6 257 - - 2.6 90.9 236 58.1 294.1 2017 2.4 147 353 2.6 257 99 2.4 238 -- 2.4 92.7 222 54.0 276.0 2018 2.3 150 345 2.5 248 99 2.3 228 -- 2.3 94.6 218 50.4 268.4 2019 2.1 153 321 2.3 227 99 2.1 208 - - 2.1 96.5 203 47.2 250.2 2020 2.0 155 310 2.2 218 99 2.0 198 36.3 234.3 2.0 98.4 197 43.2 240.2 2021 i.8 i58 284 1.9 196 103 i.8 i85 - - i.8 100.4 iSi 38.4 219.4 2022 1.7 161 274 i.8 187 104 1.7 177 - 1.7 102.4 174 34.8 208.8 2023 1.5 164 246 i.6 165 103 1.5 155 - 1.5 104.5 157 31.2 188.2 2024 1.4 i68 235 1.5 iSS 103 1.4 144 1.4 106.6 149 26.4 175.4 2025 1.2 171 205 1.3 133 102 1.2 122 19.0 14.0 1.2 109.3 131 22.8 153.8 2026 1.1 174 191 1.2 123 103 1.1 113 - -1.1 111.5 123 19.4 142.4 2027 1.0 177 177 1.1 113 103 1.0 103 -- 1.0 113.7 114 15.6 129.6 if/ Based an weighted average far firm supplies of moderate input level and temporary supplies of low input level; excluding provision of cmake.upn water. ifThe modification consists of increasing the water quantities producing the assessed IACA benefits. Water quantities are increased to 112.5% between 1975 and 1985, to 110% between 1985 and 2000, mid 107.5% thereafter. The ratio- of "scarce rabi water" to total rabi water of 1:1.35 is based on the calculated irrigation requireme~nts for wheat shown in the IACA project reports for Dipalpur Above 8.3. (1 :1 .26), Dip.1pur BeJlow B.S. (I1-1.35 and Ravi Syphon (1:1 .31 ). These ratios hod to be reduced in order to allow for the aggregation of additional watercourse availabilities with storage availabilities at rese.rvoir site. 2/Based on weighted venrage values of incremental water availabilities in eleven priority project areas totalling 5.2 million acres C.C.A. and scheduled for an increasing absorption of additional eurface water averaging 2.4 MAP by 1985 . This evaluation is based on the incremental production attainable frme an integrated cropping pattern for a complete agricultural cycle. It does not distinguish between availability at different seasons. The values beyond 1990 for which no groundwater projects data are available have been extrapolated in accordance with the trend of growth perfomnace assumed under the project up to that point. On the assumption that the increase in storage availability represents only a relatively email increase in relation to total availability this evaluation makes use of total storage availabilities over tine. Evaluation Based on Bank Group's 1965 Report 1st Phase Irrigation - Power Total Capital 0 & M Ciscounted at 13.3% Benefits Benefits Benefits Costs Costs Costs Benefits --------------------------------(Rs. million)-------------------------------------------------- 1965 10.0 8.826 - 1966 65.7 51.181 - 1967 78.1 53.698 - 1968 393.2 238.613 - 1969 436.5 233.795 - 1970 - 3.1 - 3.1 428.4 202.521 -.L65 1971 - 62.7 - 62.7 482.7 201.404 -26.161 1972 - 39.4 - 39.4 433.2 10.4 163.362 -14.516 1973 - 14.8 - 14.8 368.4 10.4 123.123 -4.811 1974 91.4 91.4 223.7 10.4 67.159 26.221 1975 447.0 260.4 707.4 56.6 10.4 16.965 179.117 1976 491.0 217.1 708.1 10.4 2.324 158.247 1977 506.0 33.2 539.2 10.4 2.051 106.356 1978 554.0 49.2 603.2 10.4 1.811 105.013 1979 581.0 20.0 601.0 10.4 1.598 92.348 1980 604.0 - 1.7 602.3 10.4 1.410 81.683 1981 628.0 - 5.4 622.6 10.4 1.245 74.525 1982 649.0 7.9 656.9 10.4 1.099 69.400 1983 652.0 131.0 783.0 10.4 0.970 73.012 1984 652.0 29.8 681.8 10.4 o.856 56.112 1985 656.0 52.6 708.6 10.4 0.755 51.472 1986 661.0 53.6 714.6 10.4 0.667 45.815 1987 662.0 53.2 715.2 10.4 o.588 40.471 1988 668.0 52.8 720.8 10.4 0.519 36.000 1989 671.0 53.1 724.1 10.4 o.458 31.919 1990 589.0 53.9 642.9 10.4 0.405 25.013 1991 586.0 55.9 641.9 10.4 0.357 22.042 1992 589.0 49.9 638.9 10.4 0.315 19.364 1993 582.0 45.1 627.1 10.4 0.278 16.775 1994 584.0 40.3 624.3 10.4 0.246 14.740 1995 570.0 35.6 605.6 10.4 0.217 12.620 1996 571.0 31.0 602.0 10.1 0.191 11.072 1997 562.0 27.7 589.7 10.4 0.169 9.573 1998 562.0 42.0 604.0 10.4 0.149 8.654 1999 551.0 42.0 593.0 10.4 0.132 7.499 2000 545.0 42.0 587.0 10.4 0.116 6.552 2001 533.0 42.0 575.0 10.4 0.102 5.664 2002 534.0 42.0 576.0 10.4 0.090 5.008 2003 518.0 42.0 560.0 10.4 0.080 4.298 2004 519.0 42.0 561.0 10.4 0.070 3.800 2005 504.0 42.0 546.0 10.4 0.062 3.264 2006 500.0 42.0 542.0 10.4 0.055 2.860 2007 484.0 42.0 526.0 10.4 o.o48 2.450 2008 479.0 46.0 525.0 10.4 0.043 2.158 2009 464.0 64.4 528.4 10.4 0.038 1.917 2010 459.0 127.9 586.9 10.4 0.033 1.879 2011 439.0 123.1 562.1 10.4 0.029 1.589 2012 432.0 55.6 487.6 10.4 0.026 1.216 2013 414.0 42.0 456.0 10.4 0.023 1.004 2014 406.0 42.8 448.8 10.4 0.020 0.872 2015 386.0 50.0 436.0 10.4 0.018 0.748 1,380.312 1,373.391 1/ In the 1965 report irrigation benefits were based on the provision of a "make-up" water compensation for the loss in storage capacity due to siltation. In order to keep the analyses comparable this analysis is based on prorating total benefits to the water quantity made available by Tarbela. 2/ Based on benefits attainable with moderate input level as defined in the 1965 report. MODIFIED IACA EVALUATION 9 nef t m C o a t s Benefit Cot Ratio Rate of Retnrn IACA IACA Mod. Eval. DBenfit Costs Power Net Recharge Total Total Capital O & M Disounted Discounted Benefit Cost Year Benefits Value Benefits Benefits Costs Costs at 8j at 8S aL12.5% atQ12.U - - ---- - - - --- (Rs. millions) -------------…----------…-- - 1965 -10.0 - 9.3 - 8.9 1966 65.7 - 56.3 - 51.9 1967 78.1 - 62.0 - 54.8 1 68 393.2 - 289.0 - 245.5 1969 436.5 - 297.1 - 242.2 1970 - 3.1 - 3.1 428.h4 -) 2.0 270.0 i-) 1.5 21U.3 1971 -62.7 -62.7 482.7 (-)36.6 281.6 (-)27.5 211.6 1972 -39.4 -39 4 433.2 10.4 (-)21.3 239.7 (-)15.4 172.9 1973 -14.8 -14.8 368.4 10.4 (-) 7.4 189.5 (-) 5.1 131.2 1974 91.4 91.4 223.7 10.4 42.3 108.4 28.2 72.1 1975 260.4 7.1 320 587.5 56.6 io.h 252.0 28.7 160.8 18.3 1976 217.1 13.5 358 588.6 * 233.7 4.1 143.2 2.5 1977 33.2 19.7 402 454.9 10.4 167.3 3.8 98.4 2.2 1978 49.2 26.9 439 515.1 10.4 175.4 3.5 99.0 2.0 1979 20.0 33.5 475 528.5 10.4 166.6 3.3 90.3 1.8 1980 - 1.7 40.5 518 556.8 10.4 162.5 3.0 84.6 1.6 1981 - 5.4 46.3 540 580.9 10.4 157.0 2.8 78.4 1.4 1982 7.9 57.4 547 612.3 10.4 153.2 2.6 73.5 1.2 1983 131.0 61.8 554 746.8 10.4 173.0 2.4 79.7 1.1 1984 29.8 73.4 561 664.2 10.4 1h2.5 2.2 63.0 1.0 1985 52.6 82.1 567 701.7 10.4 139.4 2.1 59.2 0.9 1986 53.6 91.9 580 725.9 10.4 133.5 1.9 54.4 0.8 1987 53.2 99.2 571 723.4 10.4 123.2 1.8 48.2 0.7 1988 52.8 102.8 564 719.6 10.1 113.5 1.6 42.6 o.6 1989 53.1 105.8 556 714.9 10.. 10o4.4 1.5 37.6 o.6 1990 53.9 107.9 546 707.8 10.4 95.7 l.4 33.1 0.5 1991 55.9 107.7 546 709.6 10.1. 88.3 1.3 29.5 o.4 1992 149.9 107.2 544 701.1 10.4 81.3 1.2 25.9 0.4 1993 45.1 107.4 533 685.5 10.1 73.6 1.1 22.5 0.3 1994 40.3 106.7 527 67b.0 10.4 67.0 1.0 19.7 0.3 1995 35.6 105.4 519 660.o 10.4 60.7 1.0 17.1 0.3 1996 31.0 103.4 502 636.4 0..4 54.2 0.9 14.7 0.2 19m 27.7 101.7 5o5 634.4 10.4 So.o 0.8 13.0 0.2 1998 42.0 98.8 1482 622.8 10.4 45.5 0.8 11.4 0.2 1999 42.0 95.4 462 599.4 10. 40.5 0.7 9.7 0.2 2000 42.0 91.3 470 603.3 10.4 37.8 o.6 8.7 0.2 2001 42.o 88.9 463 593.9 10.4 34.4 o.6 7.6 0.1 2002 42.0 86.5 455 583.5 10.4 31.3 o.6 6.6 0.1 2003 142.0 814.1 141.6 572.1 10.1. 28.1. 0.5 8 0 O.14a18 2004 42.0 81.6 451 574.6 10.4 26.1 0.5 5.2 0.1 2005 42.0 79.1 1441 562.4 10.4 24.0 0.4 4.5 0.1 2007 42.0 74.0 407 523.0 10.14 19.1 0.4 3.3 0.1 2008 46.0 71.3 392 509.3 10.4 17.2 0.4 2.9 0.1 2009 614.1. 68.6 371. 507.0 10.1 15a.9 0.3 2.5 0.1 2010 127.9 65.8 359 522.7 10.4 16.o 0.3 2.1 0.1 2011 123.1 63.0 340 526.1 10.4 14.1 0.3 2.1 0.0 2012 55.6 60.2 330 4.1.5.8 10.4. 11.1 0.3 1.6 0.1D 9.5 0.2 1.3 0.0 2013 42.0 57.4 31b 413.4 10.4 8.1 0.2 1.1 0.0 2011. 12.8 514.8 291. 391.6 10.1.7 0.2 0.g 0,0 2015 50.0 51.8 277 378.8 lo.14 3,352.5 1,884.8 1,148.0 1.443.0 - = _ B/C at 8% - 1.8% Rate of Return - 12.5% Evaluation Based on Average Values of Incremental Water in Project Areas and on Consultants Power Benefits Estimates Benefits of Net Associated Benefit Cost Ratio Discounlted at 8.14% Tarbela B~~echarge Power Costs of Total Capital 0 & m icone TaDelavre nft Benefits ER2mpeind8. Penefita Costs CostsDicutdBnfs Dgl-iveries Benefits_ ---- .-(B. ilios)Coats at 8% Benefits at 8% costs Bnft 1969 ~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~10.0 9*3 -9.225 - 1966 65.7 56.3 5599912 - 1967 78.1 62.0 -61.315 - 1967 393.2 289.0 -2814.771 1969 1436.5 297.1 -291.6314 19709- 3.1 3-)31 1428.1 269.9 -2 20 264.0142 - I.911 1971 L..6. ()27182.7 281.7 -36.6 274.1456 - 35.650 1972 (-)62.74 (-)62.7413. 01 239.7 -21.3 232.679 - 2o.666 1973 ( .3-4. (-)39h.8 368 .1 10.14 189 .5 - 7.14 183.293 - 7.161 19714 ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~91.14 91.1 223.7 10.14 108.14 142.3 1014.498 140.799 1979 0. 2.5 260o4 A 0.9 363.9 56.6 10.14 28.7 16i2-9 4.5 1976 186.0 31271-)1940.310.1 14.1 160.6 3.951 i93.586 1977 193.0 3.9 337.2 1.) 2.822.3 10.1 3.8 83.6 3.6149 79.656 1978 218.0 3.9 339.2 2. .8 2270.9 10.A 3.5 92.3 3.362 87.579 1979 238.0 11.2 20.0 ( 31.7 270.9 10.14 3.3 83.14 3.102 78.884 1980 2938.0 114.9 () .7 C-b.6 261.6 IO.14 3.0 76.14 2.861 71.973 1981 268.0 18.9 1 .17 5-)6. 2714.6 10.14 2.8 714.2 2.6140 69.695 1982 2683.0 29.2 7.9 6-.54 308.7 10.1I 2.6 77.3 2.1435 72.279 1983 292.0 28.3 13.0 C-?.3 3083.7 10.14 2.14 102.6 2.2146 95.666 19814 306.0 32.3 291.80- 8.9 U36.7 10.14 2.2 77.8 2.072 72.271 198h 3o6.o 35.L 29.8 8.5 362.7 ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~10.1 2.1 78.3 1.912 72.14214 1989 310.0 140.1 52.6 -)8.7 3914.0 10.14 1.9 714.9 1.7614 69.067 1986 317.0 149.5 53.6 C)8.8 1407.3 ICA ~ 1.8 70.7 1.627 614.9014 1987 320.0 90.7 93.2 C)9.0 141.9 1oJ, 1.6 67.3 1.901 61.563 1988 328.0 514.9 52.8 C)9.1 1426.6 10.14 1.9 614.1 1.385 58.1403 1989 336.0 58.9 53.1 C)9.3 1438.7 10.14 1.14 60.14 1.277 514.897 1990 339.0 63.6 53.9 C)9.5 14147.0 10.14 1.3 56.9 1.178 91.919 1993. 3143.0 65.14 99.9 C- .6 141.7 10.14 1.2 92.3 1.087 147.1147 1992 3145.0 65.9 149.9 C)9.7 1451.1. 10.14 1.1 147.9 1.003 142.992 1993 3143.0 67.7 149.1 Q-)Q9 14499 10,14 1.0 144.3 0.925 39.625 19914 3146.0 69.2 140.3 C-)10.0 1454.590h094.10833 5 1995 3141.0 69.1 35.6 (-)10.2 1435.8 10.1 0.9 140.1 0.7873 32.685 1996 3142.0 69.1 31.0 ()033l810.1 0.8 33.3 0.726 29.1496 1997 336.0 69.2 27.7 C-)io.9 1422.14 10.14 0.7 32.0 0.670 28.189 1998 337.0 69.2 142.0 M1)0.6 1437.6 10.14 0.7 29.1 0.618 25.565 1999 330.0 69.0 142.0 C-)Io.8 1430.2 10.1 0.7 26.9 0.570 23.551 2000 331.0 67.5 142.0 C-)i0.9 1429.610 o626o5621 3 2001 3214.0 67.9 142.0 (-)1fl.9 123.14 10.14 0.6 214.6 085 219.7673 2002 3214.0 67.9 142.0 (-)10.2 1423.7 10.14 0.6 22.7 0.4489 179176 20034 316.0 68.0 142.0 C)9.14 16.6 10.14 0.9 19.1 0.1413 16.501. 2004 315.0 ~~~~~68.o 142.0 C)9.1 b150.6 10.14 0.14 17.2 0.381 114.95B 2005 307.0 65 2091o8b10.14 0.14 16.1 0.351 13.796 206 3o6.0 69.1 142.0 -)8.8 1-08.3 10.1 0.14 114.6 0.3214 12.14146 2007 297.0 68.8 142.0 C- .9 399.3 10.14 0.14 13.6 0.299 ii.5314 2008 295.0 68.3 146.0 C)8.2 1-01.1 10.14 0.3 12.8 0.276 10.833 2009 285.0 67.0 64.14 -)8.0 WAo.1 10o.1 0.3 13.6 0.2514 11.1457 I 2010 ~~~~~220 66.0o2. C)'7 148 10.1 0.3 12.2 0.235 10.21.3 I 2011 272.0 614.6 123.1 ()7.3 l2.410.14 0.3 9.5 0.217 7.928 2012 269.0 63.0 55.6 C)6.9 - 380.71040.81020680 2013 297.0 61.6 142.0 C-) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~6.6 3914.0 10.1. 0.2 7.9 0.1814 6.1919 2011i 293.0 60.3 142.8 C- 6.3 3149.8IC026. 17563 2019 2141.0 59.14 0.0 5- .9 3141.5 01 . . .7 .3 1.8814.8 _1.993.6 1,838.375 1,832.0142 8/C Ratio - 1.1 Rat. of Return - 8.14% Ev~aluation Based on Aeae Vleof cren,ntal Water in Project Areas Wlith Bank ropsAsseeaeect of Power Benefits Benefits of Net Associated Benefit Cost Ratio Rate of Retw Tarbnsla Recharge Porer Costs Of Total Capital 0 & N Deliveries Benefits Benefits Renedelling Benefits Costs Costs Coste at 8% Benefits at 8% Costs at 9.2%9 Benefits at 9.2% - --------- --- --- -------- (Rs.nmillions)- -- - - -- ----- --------------- --- 1965 10.0 9.259 - .158- 1966 65.7 56.327 -55.096- 1967 2.1. 2.1. 78.1 6i.998 i.905 59.977 1.80. 1968 10.9 10.9 393.2 289.0Th 8.012 276.518R 7.665 1969 1.5.1 1.5.1 1.36.5 297.075 30.691. 281.107 29.01. 1970 ()50.9 ()50.9 128.1. 269.965 '(-3 32.076 252.61.7 (330.0n8 1971 155.2 155.2 1,82.7 281.651 9o.558 260.687 83.817 1972 137.7 137.7 1.33.2 10.1 239.665 71,.395 219.387 68.i0l 1973 186.3 186.3 368.1. 10.1. 189.h.91 93.196 171.556 8b.371. 1971. 7.2 7.2 223.7 10.1. I08.131- 3.335 97.090 2.986 1975 102.0 2.5 ()36.8 ()0.9 66.8 56.6 10.4. 28.735 28.66.9 25.hh16 25.370 1976 186.0 3.1 (369.8 ()1.9 117.4. 10.1. h.130 1.6.621 3.617 1.0.832 1977 193.0 3.9 (3127.0 (32.8 67.1 10.1. 3.824. 21,.673 3.312 21.371 1978 218.0 7.5 212.8 (33.8 1.3h.5 10.1. 3.51Li 117.930 3.033 126.728 1979 238.0 11.2 138.7 (-h.7 383.2 10.1 3.279 120.801 2.718 102.350 1980 251.0 11.9 97.9 (35.6 361.2 10.1. 3.036 105.1.31 2.5LL1 88.OW 1981 268.0 18.5 1.7.0 (36.5 327.0 10.1 2.811 88.378 2.329 '73.21. 1982 283.0 25.2 (3110. (3 7.1. 1910.5 10.1. 2603 1.7.672 2.133 39.07h 1983 ~~~292.0 28.3 C- lo. (383 6.51. 2 1,10 60.821. 1.953 1.9.3o6 1981. 306.0 35.1. 94..3(3 8.5 1.27.2 10.1. 2.231 921.655 1.789 73.1.82 1985 310.0 1.0.1 109.6 (38.7 1.51.0 10.1 2.066 89.591. 1.638 71.01.0 1986 317.0 1.5.5 125.7 (38.8 1.79.L 10.1. 1.913 88.181 i.500 69.i51 1987 320.0 50.7 129.5 ()9.0 1.91.2 10.1. 1.771 83.659 1.371. 61.881. 1988 328.0 51..9 133.3 (39.1 507.1 10.1 i.61.0 79.969 1.258 61.31.1 1989 336.0 58.9 136.2 (39.3 521.8 10.1. 1.519 76.192 1.152 57.801 1990 339.0 63.6 139.5 (39.5 532.6 10.1 1.1.06 72.oo8 i.055 5L.027 1991 31..0 65.1. 1U..3-3 9.6 51.3.l 10.1 1.302 67.989 0.966 50.1.51 1992 315.0 65.9 111.3 (39.7 50..5 10.1. 1.206 63.231 0.885 1.6.1.05 1993 31..0 67.7 114.13(3 9.9 51.54 10.1 1.116 58.501. 0.810 L.2161. 1991. 31.6.0 69.2 1114.3 (-)10.0 51.9.5 M0.1 1.031. 51,.608 0.71.2 39.200 1995 31a.o. 69.1. 11..3 (-310.2 51..5 I0.1 0.957 50.103 0.679 35.571 1996 31.2.0 69.1 1I1.3 (-310.3 51.5.1 10.1 0.S86 1.6.1.13 0.622 32.610 1997 336.0 69.2 11..3 (-310.5 539.0 10.1. 0.820 1.2.521 0.570 29.529 1998 337.0 69.2 11..3 (-310.6 539.9 10.1. 0.76o 39.1.7 0.522 27.086 1999 330.0 69.0 111h.3 (-310.8 532.5 10.1 0.703 36.oi5 0.1.78 21.1.61 2000 331.0 67.5 1114.3 (-310.9 531.9 10.1 0.651 33.310 0.1.8 22.378 2001 321.0 67.9 1I1.3 (-)10.5 525.7 10.1. 0.603 30.1.3 0.1.01 20.251. 2002 321..0 67.9 IU..3 (-)l0.2 526.0 10.1. 0.558 28.21.1 0.367 18.558 2003 316.0 68.0 111.3 (39.8 518.5 10.1 0.517 25.776 0.336 16.752 2001. 315.0 68.0 1U.13(3 9.1. 517.9 10.1. 0.1.79 23.839 0.308 15.323 2005 307.0 68.5 111.3 (39.1 510.7 10.1 0.1.13 21.767 0.292 13.837 2006 3o6.0 69.1 -(38.8 366.3 10.1. 0.1.10 11.656 0.258 9.088 2007 297.0 68.8 -(38.5 357.3 10.1 0.380 13.056 0.236 8.118 2008 295.0 68.3 - (38.2 355.1 10.1. 0.352 12.0Th 0.216 7.388 2009 285.0 67.o - ()8.0 34.1.0 10.b 0.326 10.777 0.198 6.555 2010 282.0 66.0 - ()7.7 31.0.3 10.1 0.302 9.871 0.181 5.938 2011. 272.0 64.6 - ()7.3 327.3 10.1 0.279 8.791 0.166 5.230 2012 269.0 63.0 - ()6.9 325.1 10.1. 0.259 8.085 0.152 1..757 2013. 257.0 61.3 - (36.3 307.0 10.1 0.239 6.5186 0.128 3.767 2013 257.0 61.6 - (36.6 312.0 10.1. 0.239 6.581. 0.139 3.767 2015 211.0 59.1. - (35.9 29h.5 10.1 0.205 5.811 0.117 3.39 1.88h.8 2.1111.750.3 1791 B/C Ratio - 1.2:1 Rate/Return - 9.2% FIGURE I PAG E I TARBELA PROJECT WATER COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND SUPPLIES BY SOURCES (SYSTEM SUMMARY- 1985 CONDITIONS) 18 18 16 16 TOTAL WATER COURSE REQUIREMENTSA 14 14 STORAGE RELEASE PERIOD / 12 12 t ~SCARC E WATE R/ 10 -PERIOD D- / 10 8 8 \ X T ~~~~WATER COURSE \ ff Ws / ~~~AVAILABILITY \ ff t ~~~~IN SCARCE 6 I # X - WATER PERIOD 6 4 * . O *S4 2 _ **- .... --* ;, ...........-I 2 \GRINDWATER SUPPLIES OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP d* WATER YEAR 1985 IBRD -3434 Fig. 1 Page 2 Tarbela Project Watercourse Requirements and Supplies by Sources System Summary - 1985 Condition System Totals: MAF % Watercourse Requirements 116.5 100.0 Groundwater 42.1 36.1 Surface Water (incl. Tarbela 4.29 = 3.7%) 74.4 63.9 Monthly Distribution (rounded): Surface Water 1/ Tarbela Groundwater Total Month MA? Percent/Month MAF Percent/Month MAF Percent/Month MAF Percent/Month October 6.1 54.5 - 0.0 5.1 45.5 11.2 9.6 November 2.3 41.1 0.4 7.1 2.9 51.8 5.6 4.8 December 2.1 44.7 0.5 10.6 2.1 44.7 4.7 4.0 January 2.0 35.7 0.9 16.1 2.7 48.2 5.6 4.8 February 3.0 34.9 1.1 12.8 4.5 52.3 8.6 7.4 March 3.9 44.8 0.9 10.4 3.9 44.8 8.7 7e5 April 5.1 73.9 0.5 7.3 1.3 18.8 6.9 5.9 May 7.1 78.9 - 0.0 1.9 21.1 9.0 7.7 June 10.0 74.6 - 0.0 3.4 25.4 13.4 11.5 July 9.3 71.5 - 0.0 3.7 28.5 13.0 11.2 August 10.2 65.8 - 0.0 5.3 34.2 15.5 13.3, September 9.0 62.9 - 0.0 5.3 37.1 14.3 12.3 70.1 4.3 42.1 116.5 100.0 1/ Exclusive of Tarbela. ANNEX 4.1 Page 21 II. GROUNDTATER DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS A. General Aspects of the Projects 1. Introduction 2.01 This chapter is concerned with the 12 tubewell projects identi- fied and formulated by IACA within the canal commanded areas of the Indus Plains (see Map). The selection of priorities, the priority status of each project, and the integration of projects with those presently on-going in West Pakistan into an internally consistent groundwater development program is dealt with in Chapters III and IV of Volume II of the Bank Group's Report. 2.02 Details of IACA's project 9roposals and their evaluation are given in its Comprehensive Report. l The Bank Group has reviewed IACA's proposals and its conclusions together with a brief summary of the main features of each project is given below. Many considerations are, how- ever, common to all the projects and to avoid undue repetition, the chapter has been divided into two parts. Part A deals with the common features and Part B with the specifics of each of the 12 projects. 2. Project Preparation 2.03 IACA has identified and formulated 12 public tubewell projects. As far as available information would permit, it has appraised the technical and organizational aspects and the financial and economic feasibility of each of these projects. In the course of a major study of this kind, IACA could not undertake the detailed investigations required to produce definitive project reports. IACA's findings must therefore be regarded as preliminary and subject to confirmation or modifi- cation in the light of more detailed engineering, agricultural, and economic studies required to produce final project reports and enable the preparation of tender documents. 2.04 The extent and depth of further investigations would vary for each project area but in general they should cover the items listed under the following five sub-headings: (a) Technical Feasibility The following studies and investigations would have to be carried out to determi-ne the technical feasibility and detailed cost estimates of the proposed projects: (i) topographic surveys as required for detailed project design; 1/ IACA Comprehensive Report, Volumes 12, 1, 16 and 20. ANNEX 4.1 Page 22 (ii) additional groundwater surveys as required including depth to water table, groundwater quality, physical properties of the aquifer(s) including safe yields, groundwater movements and possibilities of saline groundwater movements and intrusion, requirements of drainage including those for tile drainage where applicable and flood protection; (iii) detailed survey of canal system and watercourses serving the project area, including existing canal discharge capacities, canal regime stabilities under existing and projected conditions and requirements for enlargement, remodelling and realignment; (iv) approximate siting of individual tubewells including determination of capacities, specifications for wells and equipment, appurtenant structures including those required for mixing of surface and groundwater; (v) survey of electrification requirements including alignment of transmission lines and specifications of equipment required for energizing the number and capacities of wells determined; (vi) survey of existing transport systems serving the project areas, including needs for extension, improvement, realignment, etc; (vii) preparation of detailed procurement and construction schedules for all physical works to be included under the projects. (b) Agriculture The following studies and investigations should be carried out to determine the agricultural benefits likely to be derived from the implementation of the projects proposed: (i) correlation of existing soil surveys of the project area and their supplementation as required including delineation of areas affected by salinity and alkalin- ity; attention would need to be given to possible soil texture problems because of their relevance for irrigation practices, and to reclamation requirements; AaNMEX 4.l Page 23 (ii) survey of uncommanded areas within or adjacent to project areas for possible inclusion under the projects; (iii) land use classification to determine the agricultural production potential of the project area; (iv) updating of inventory of existing private tubewell development including area density, capacities and types of wells, relationship of well installation and farm size, areas commanded and distribution of private tubewell water with a view to providing a basis for decision on possible public interference with private development; (v) verification of intensities and cropping patterns assumed in project proposals, both for fresh ground- water and mixing zones, crop water requirements, estimates of current costs and value of agricultural production, projections for crop production and live- stock production, requirements of physical on-farm inputs, and marketing prospects; (vi) assessment of on-farm input requirements, prospects of supply and supporting services. (c) Project Operation The following aspects should be reviewed for the individual project areas to outline operational procedures for the projects: (i) the operational requirements for the integration of surface and groundwater supplies in relation to water requirements of the project cropping patterns; (ii) areas in which mixing of surface water with ground- water would be required and their mixing ratios; (iii) operational procedures needed to relate canal deliveries to mixing requirements and water demands for cropping patterns proposed for mixing zones and accordingly operational procedures for tubewells in mixing zones; (iv) possibilities for substitution of surface water by groundwater should be further investigated. ANNEX 4.h Page 24 (d) Financial Aspects The financial implications of the project proposals should be reviewed with regard to the following aspects: (i) preparation of detailed investment cost estimates, including expenditure schedules commensurate with construction schedules and broken down into foreign exchange and local currency requirements, as well as estimates of operation and maintenance expenditures; (ii) assessment of capacity of ultimate beneficiaries to recover project costs. (e) Economic Aspects The economic evaluation of the project proposals and feasible alternatives contained in Part B below should be verified in the light of the findings of the above outlined studies and investigations. 3. Project Management 2.05 As discussed in Chapter VI B of Volume II IACA has proposed that after completion of project construction, the operation of the project and the provision of supporting services would be carried out by the regular line departments, specifically the departments of Irrigation and Agriculture. It has further proposed that these activ- ities would be coordinated through a Project Field Force (PFF) which would consist of a chairman appointed from the Civil Service of Pakistan (CSP) and ranking officers representing the line departments most directly concerned in the project area. The PFF would operate under the auspices of the Land and Water Development Board (LWdDB). The Chairman of the PFF would not have direct authority over the officers of the line departments but would be responsible for monitoring the project and ensuring that the development objectives were being achieved. 2.06 The Bank Group thoroughly endorses IACA's emphasis on moni- toring and keeping careful check on the progress of the project, but does not wholly agree with IACA's proposals for project management in other aspects. In general, it would favor a form of integrated project management similar to that presently adopted by the ADC and LWDB. As discussed in Chapter VI B of Volume II, the Bank Group feels that the integration of substantial increases in water availability with rapid agricultural development including the essential agricultural extension services and greatly increased on-farm inputs is a demanding task requiring a high degree of coordination and overall direction. The ANNEX 4.1 Government has recognized this need in the past and has made institutional provision for integrated project management under the ADC and LWDB. Under this concept the Irrigation Department should, in the Bank Group's opinion, continue to operate the main surface water supply system and deliver supplies to the project area. The integration of surface supplies with groundwater within the project areas would be the responsibility of the project management which would need to be kept advised of likely surface deliveries. The coordination of surface water deliveries between the Irrigation Department and the project management would take place at the level of the LWDB. 2.07 The project management would continue to be responsible for all services within the project area only so long as this would be con- sidered necessary. When an appropriate stage of development and organiza- tion has been reached, the initial project management would withdraw. It would be replaced by some more permanent arrangement incorporating full farmer participation and local authorities while the line departments would resume direct responsibility for providing their normal services. 4. Recover.y of Costs 2.08 No policy decision has been taken by the Government of Pakistan with regard to the water charges to be levied on beneficiaries of public tubewell projects. Because of the integrated use of surface and ground- water supplies, any such decision will have to be made in the context of basin-wide development. In the opinion of the Bank Group, every effort should be made to make the projects self-liquidating. This would require consolidated water charges (for both surface and groundwater) ranging from Rs. 30 to Rs. 40 per cropped acre. The Bank Group would favor a system of wiater charges which would provide incentives for the increase of cropped acres, i.e. based on CCA rather than cropped acres. Initial periods, however, of no recovery or gradually increasing recovery schedules may need to be introduced to stimulate the immediate and effective use of the water resources developed. 5. General Approach and Design Criteria (a) Scope and Size of Projects 2.09 IACA's proposals are based on an integrated exploitation of groundwater by public tubewells, designed in capacity, area density, and rate of utilization to extract from the aquifer the estimated average annual recharge. As designed the projects would enable a stabilization of the groundwater table at a level of around ten to 15 feet. In most cases this would require a higher rate of pumping in the early period of the projects in order to lower the water table to this depth. ANNEX 4.1 Page 26 2.10 In its project formulation IACA has taken the view that until the water table has been lowered to a depth of about ten feet no addi- tional surface water should be admitted to the Droject area. The Bank Group would not support the rigid application of this principle. The relationship between additional water applications and water table rise would appear to allow considerable latitude, and in the Bank Group's opinion, temporary rises in water table may be tolerated in the interest of rapid growth of production. 2.11 Varying proportions of areas underlain by groundwater which would require mixing with good quality surface water are included in the projects. The pumping period in the mixing zones would be extended to take advantage of surface supplies for mixing within the existing operational procedures of canal systems, but cropping intensities in the mixing zones would in most cases not be as high as in fresh ground- water zones. This factor was taken into account by IACA when estimating the average cropping intensities at full irrigation applications for project areas. 2.12 IACA has assessed the water requirements on the basis of full delta related to ultimate levels of production and irrigation practice and so provides for a level of water availability considerably in excess of water applications used at present levels of farming (see Chapter II, Volume II). The proposed projects, together with additional surface water supplies, would enable farmers to increase water applica- tions on the existing cropped acreage to full delta and also to expand cropped acreage up to an average intensity of about 150 percent. 2.13 Projects cover areas within which the development character- istics and constraints are as similar as possible. In order to facilitate integration with the existing system of surface water distribution, the areas covered by individual projects generally coin- cide with the canal commands. In certain cases this criterion is modified to take into account local conditions of groundwater depth or quality and agricultural factors. The smallest unit to form part of a project is a distributary canal, because surface water releases cannot be controlled downstream of a distributary head. 2.14 IACA has generally adopted a minimum size of tubewell pro- ject of about 500 wells, covering slightly more than a quarter of a million acres, in the belief that competitive tenders could not be expected for smaller contracts and staff requirements would be out of proportion to the size of the schemes. The average size of the 12 groundwater projects proposed is about half a million acres. The size of tubewell projects could be reduced further, especially if construc- tion is carried out by force account. Care should be taken, however, that contiguous areas in size consistent with at least the smallest controllable unit of surface water distribution are being covered by a project. Only in the latter case can a satisfactory integration of ground- and surface water be achieved under public control. ANNEX 4.1 (b) Installed Tubewell Capacity 2.15 The requirements for groundwater have been estimated in relation to surface water availability. The installed capacity is designed to enable the full integration of groundwater with variable surface water supplies at a level which would ensure full supplies to the project areas in any month in four years out of five. Requirements in the mixing zones, where groundwater would have to be mixed with surface water before being used for irrigation, have been considered separately from those of the fresh groundwater zones where tubewell water would be applied directly to the crops. 2.16 In the mixing zones, the amount of groundwater used is deter- mined by the total watercourse requirements and the adopted mixing ratios shown below: Proposed Mixing RatiOs for Public Tubewell Project All Regions Except Lower Indus Lower Indus Region Deep Average Mixing Deep Average Mixing Groundwater Requirements Groundwater Requirements Groundwater Quality (surface water Quality (surface water Quality Zone (ppm TDS) to groundwater) (ppm TDS) to groundwater) Fresh Less than No restriction Less than No restriction 1,000 1,000 Mixing 1,000-2,000 1 : 1 1,000-2,000 - 1 : 1 2,000-3,000 2½ : 1 Saline More than Not used More than Not used 3,000 2,000 1/ The lower limit allows for the more rapid increase in groundwater salinity with aquifer depth in the Lower Indus Region. It would be necessary for adequate surface water deliveries to be made available to mixing zones in all years despite low flows that may occur in the river system. In detailed project investigations account would also have to-be taken of the fact that surface water deliveries cannot be varied within the area served by a single distributary canal which may serve both fresh groundwater and mixing areas. ANNEX 4.1 Page 28 2.17 In fresh groundwater zones, further design objectives have been to minimize projects costs, to relate power demand with power availa- bility, and to obtain the most efficient use of all available water resources. When river flows are high, the canals to these zones would be run full and groundwater pumped only to make up residual requirements. In the months of April, May and June, surface water would, as far as possible, be supplied in preference to groundwater in order to increase hydro energy generation and alleviate load constraints of the power system. As the installed tubewell capacity is determined by peak pumping requirements, surface water supplies in the remaining months would be regulated in order to avoid high pumping peaks over short periods of time. As stated above, these principles would require further attention in the course of detailed project preparation to take account of the operational problems on distributary canals which serve both fresh ground- water and mixing zones. 2.18 On these principles, the theoretical pumping capacity necessary to meet the groundwater requirements in association with surface supplies for full development has been estimated. The theoretical capacity has then been increased by 15 percent to allow for uncertainties in design criteria and for daily shutdowns required to reduce peak demands on the power system mainly in April and May. The daily shutdowns have been estimated in cooperation with the Power Consultant I/ and are expected to be for periods of about two hours on 75 percent of the public tubewells in usable groundwater zones, phased over the four hours of peak power demand. The proportion of 75 percent represents approximately the ratio of tubewells in fresh groundwater zones to the total public tubewells in- stalled for irrigation. 2.19 The capacity of individual tubewells would be limited by the hydrological conditions of the aquifer. In favorable circumstances, the output would be four to five cusecs but in many cases it would be less than four cusecs. Subject to these hydrological limitations, individual tubewell capacities would be determined by the estimated groundwater requirements for individual watercourses or for two or more watercourses where it would be desirable and convenient that one tube- well serve more than one watercourse. Hydrological conditions and the exigencies of mixing surface water with the groundwater would require generally lower capacities in the mixing zones than in the fresh groundwater zones. 2.20 The exact number of tubewells of each capacity would have to be determined by detailed surveys of the watercourses in each project area. For the purposes of project planning, IACA has assumed that capacities would generally vary between two and five cusecs with possibly 1/ Stone and Webster Overseas Consultants, Inc. ANNEX 4.1 Page 29 -- a few smaller wells in mixing zones. The detailed analysis of Upper Rechna area, contained in the SCARPIV Report prepared by Tipton and Kalmbach, Inc. for WAPDA, indicates an average tubewell capacity in fresh groundwater zones of about four cusecs. This average figure has been adopted in IACA's project proposals. In the mixing zones, IACA estimates that average capacities would be about three cusecs in zones with deep groundwater quality from 1,000 to 2,000 ppm TDS and two cusecs in zones with deep groundwater quality from 2,000 to 3,000 ppm TDS. (c) Type of Tubewell, Location and Discharge Control 2.21 The design of the tubewells would depend on experience gained from on-going projects in WTest Pakistan and the state of technology at the time that contracts would be prepared for tender. The depth of the wells would vary from a general average of about 340 feet for five cusec wells to 200 feet for two cusec wells. IACA anticipates the use of fiberglass screens and sees no reason to depart from the present practice of using electrically powered shaft driven pumps. A high standard of maintenance is recommended in order to achieve the high and sustained standard of tubewell operation assumed. 2.22 Tubewells would generally be sited as near as possible to the heads of the watercourses which they are designed to serve. IACA considers that the widespread installation of tubewells to discharge directly into canals would not be desirable in the next decade as it would entail extensive enlargement of the canal system and so introduce additional constraints on the rate of development. In mixing zones, tubewells discharging into canals would also have the undesirable side effect of causing an accumulation of dissolved solids towards the tail of the system. Nonetheless, tubewells discharging into the canal system would have some advantages. They would be of uniformly high capacity and would improve the flexibility in operation of the canal system. It is, therefore, probable that later developments would include tube- wells sited in this way and in special cases they may be justified on a small scale during the next decade. 2.23 In the mixing zones, the practical difficulties of mixing may require sub-minor canals to be constructed to carry mixed water parallel to the existing distributary or minor canals. The best methods of opera- tion for mixing would need to be determined through experience. 6. Project Evaluation (a) Mode of Development 2.24 The priorities for groundwater development have been established by IACA in the broader context of basin development. To decide on the mode of development (public or private), for each of the 12 projects, IACA has made a comparison between the proposed public sANNEX 4.1 Page 30 tubewell project (case 1) and as an alternative continued private tube- well development (case 2). In those cases where the rate of return on the incremental investment and the rate of development, as measured by the growth of NPV, is superior under the public alternative IACA has recommended this mode of development. To determine the rate of return on total investment in public tubewell projects a comparison has also been made against the growth in NPV attainable "without" further water development (case 3). 2.25 The Bank Group in its project evaluation has generally followed the same procedure but - in keeping with recent experience - has adopted a somewhat more optimistic view than IACA with regard to the rate of private tubewell installation and their probable utilization in specific areas in the absence of public development. The Bank Group has also assumed a somewhat higher rate of yield growth than IACA prior to the occurrence of the projects as well as in the absence of public tubewell development (case 2) in accordance with the discussion of yields in Chapter II, Volume II. These adjustments tend to strengthen the case for private groundwater development. In its review of the proposed mode of development, the Bank Group has also had regard to the broader aspect of overall growth of agricultural production. In a particular project area, on the basis of a straight comparison, a public project may be superior to private development but, if the productive capacity of the private development is considerable, the overall effect on agricultural growth may be improved if the scarce public resource was deployed in areas less suited to private initiative. (b) Economic Evaluation 2.26 For purposes of determining the return on investment, IACA has assessed the effects of the projects on agricultural production on the basis of the increase in production, or incremental Net Production Value (NPV), attributable to each project. This has been done by com- paring the NPV "with" the project to the NPV "without" the project. The latter is the NPV assumed to result if no additional tubewells were installed after the scheduled starting date for project construction. l/ 2.27 IACA has further assessed the effects of public tubewell projects by comparison with continued private development and relating the in- cremental production to the incremental costs of public projects over con- tinued private development. In its project reviews in Part B the Bank Group has departed from this approach inasmuch as it has related total public project costs to the incremental benefits and added to the benefit 1/ This "without" case is based on the hypothetical assumption that no further groundwater development- private or public - would take place. Its sole purpose is as an aid in the assessment of the beneficial effect of the provision of incremental water supplies. ANNEX 4.1 Page 31 streams, in a separate analysis, potential savings accruing to the private sector. In its project reviews the Bank Group also employed yield growth assumptions somewhat at variance with IACA as described later in para 2.30. Because of the different production levels arising from these changes the Bank Group also adjusted the on-farm costs and assumed that in both "with" and "without" cases farm costs would amount to about 32 percent of gross production value in 1975 rising to about 36 percent by 1985. This is the same relationship as in IACA's "with" case. In order to determine the beneficial effects of water development the Bank Group has assumed that the rates of application of agricultural inputs not dependent on additional water (other than mechanization requirements, and hired labor) would be similar in both the "with" and "without" cases. The incremental NPV thus measures essentially the contribution of the additional water made avail- able as a result of tubewell projects. This incremental NPV is then related to the total capital and operating costs of tubewell projects to determine the rates of return. 2.28 Not all of the increase in production is due to tubewell water alone, however, and most of the tubewell projects, after providing for water table control, would make use of increased quantities of surface water as well. In order to arrive at the incremental benefits attributable to the tubewell projects only, the Bank Group has allocated the incre- mental benefits "with" the project to the two sources of additional water combined. This procedure permits the calculation of an average value per additional acre foot of incremental water supplied to the project area from both sources. The additional surface water used in the project areas, over and above the historical deliveries, varies from project to project and has been determined from the annual water budgets prepared by IACA and given in the project reviews in Part II B. The quantities of additional surface water in different years have been valued at the average value per acre foot of all additional water for those years. The allocation of benefits to additional surface water, determined in this manner, has then been subtracted from the total incremental NPV to derive an estimate of the incremental benefits due to tubewells alone. For certain projects where the reverse is true, i.e., where the project area would absorb less surface water than under historical deliveries, the value of surface water savings (computed in the same manner) has been added to incremental benefits from the project on the assumption that the water saved would find a beneficial use outside the specific project area roughly equivalent to that within the project area. -' The allocation of incremental benefits to additional surface water supplies accounts to a large extent for the differences in evaluation results between IACA and the Bank Group.' 1/ It is recognized that this is only a rough approximation. Inasmuch as water will become.increasingly scarce as development proceeds the Bank Group feels, however, that this would not be an undue bias in favor of the tubewell projects. ANN~EX 4.1 Page 32 2.29 The Bank Group has made upward adjustments in IACA's public tubewell cost estimates amounting to about 20 percent in total, primarily in order to provide a greater allowance for contingencies at this early stage of project preparation as well as allowing for additional work for construction of sub-minor canals in mixing zones and watercourses improve- ments likely to be needed for the immediate and efficient distribution of greatly increased watercourse deliveries. The cost of providing infra- structure, support services, and project operation and maintenance have also been charged against incremental benefits. In conformity with IACA procedures, on-farm production costs have been subtracted directly from the Gross Production value (GPV) in arriving at the NPV for the "with" and "without" cases. 2.30 The Bank Group has followed IACA's estimates of cropping intensities and cropping patterns, but, as pointed out above, has made some adjustments in the yield growth patterns. Although for the "with'" case current yields and ultimate yields by the year 2000 are the same as those adopted by IACA, the Bank Group has tended to smooth out the increase in yields between reference years for the "with" case (the exception being increases in excess of six percent per annum which realistically cannot be achieved). This process of smoothing out in- creases has the effect of eliminating the automatic and rapid responses of yields to the sudden availability of greatly-increased water supplies as assumed in the IACA projections. In the Bank Group's opinion such a rapid growth of yields is not likely to occur from increased water avail- ability alone except in cases where crucial shortages are being eliminated. 2.31 For the "without" case, the Bank Group has generally assumed higher future yields than IACA has used. This is particularly true for the important cash crops of cotton, wheat, sugarcane, fruit, and vegetables where the yield projections of the "'with" case have been used. The main considerations which have led the Bank Group to adjust upward the IACA pro- jections for the "without" cases are as follows: (i) the existing irrigation water availability is presently less than IACA's estimated ultimate full delta require- ments but approaches a level of about 80 percent of full delta on average except for the Sutlej and Panjnad Left Bank areas. At these .levels of water supplies and with no expansion of cropped acreage the Bank Group considers that farmers would be selective in deciding the water applications given to different crops. It has therefore been assumed that farmers would apply close to full irrigation requirements to the major cash crops while continuing under-irrigation of the non-cash crops. The extent to which such priority allocation could be exer- cised would vary between project areas; ANNEX 4.1 Page 33 (ii) operating on a much reduced cropped acreage and a level of farm inputs similar to that of the "with" case, farmers would be able to compensate to some extent for lower deltas by other inputs and improved husbandry practices on the smaller cropped acreage. (iii) Farmers could, to a limited extent, counteract effects of waterlogging and salinity at the lower levels of cropping intensity by adjusting their cropping programs in accordance with the degree to which their lands become affected. 2.32 IACA's estimates of livestock population have been derived from the Census of Agriculture (1960) and adjusted to allow for growth between 1960 and 1965. On the basis of animal feed available from fodder, crop residues, and grazing, expressed in terms of total digestible nutrients (TDN), IACA has calculated the probable output of milk, meat, and animal by-products. Work animals have the first claim on the available TDN at the rate (in 1965) of 1,035 kilograms per animal unit per year, and the balance of TDN is assumed to be devoted to the production of milk and meat on the basis of a calculated TDN-to-product relationship. The Bank Group projections of gross production value from livestock in the "with" cases are somewhat lower than those of IACA resulting from the lower estimates of fodder yields and crop residues following from the adjustments of yield growth for crops other than fodder. The Bank Group has used IACA's TDN-to-product relationship. In the "without" cases, however, the higher feed availa- bility from increased crop residues resulting from the Bank Group's yield assumptions have not been translated into higher gross production values from animal husbandry because of the reservations the Bank Group has with regard to the comparability of TDN derived from fodder and from crop residues. 7. Associated Agricultural Inputs 2.33 It would be essential to develop a high level of agricultural extension and supply services in any project area to achieve the standard of agricultural production assumed in either the "with" or "without" case. The main productive inputs, in addition to improved irrigation supplies and better husbandry practices, would be fertilizers, better seeds, and timely and adequate plant protection. No attempt has been made to estimate the physical quantities required. These inputs would be expected to grow at a considerable rate as reflected in the assumed on-farm expenditures. ANNEX 4.1 Page 34 2.34 Absorption of the physical quantities of inputs represented by the estimated on-farm expenditures in the project areas would require considerable extension efforts as well as improvements in the supply system. Furthermore, their adoption would depend upon the decision of numerous farmers which would need to be given adequate in- centives and stimulation for their use. In addition, the availability of credit would be equally important to the realization of the assumed input levels. The Bank Group feels that the growth of production projected in the project areas depends as much on the increased use of on-farm inputs and better husbandry practices as it does on the availability of additional irrigation water, and therefore would emphasize the need for adequate provision of such inputs especially in the project areas. In the course of detailed project preparation the above aspects should be accorded the attention and weight which their importance merits. 8. Alternative Private Development 2.35 Because the project areas selected by IACA are all located in usable groundwater zones an alternative to a public tubewell project would in all cases be for farmers to continue installation of privately owned wells. In IACA's project formulation, public and private tube- wells have been assumed to be mutually exclusive within the same area, i.e. a public tubewell project would displace existing private tubewells and inhibit further private installations. IACA has analyzed the reports and records of' private tubewell development up to 1965 in the Punjab and from this analysis has projected general trends and used these trends to estimate the number of private tubewells likely to be installed in the project areas during the life span of the public project. On this basis IACA estimates that the annual rate of growth of private tubewell in- stallations would vary amongst the project areas from almost zer6 in the Sind to about 20 percent in the Bari Doab area in the Punjab. On the basis of the rates of private installations projected for each project area IACA has made a comparison with the public tubewell project proposals. The extent of private tubewell coverage in 1965 ranged from three to 50 percent of the project areas. In 1975 the extent of private tubewell coverage is projected to range from 13 to 66 percent, and in 1985 from 27 to 84 percent. The highest private tubewell densities are to be found in the Punjab, especially the Bari Doab, while the lowest densities occur in the Sind. 2.36 The actual quantity of water made available by private tubewell depends not only on the number but also on the capacity and the utiliza- tion rate of the wells. IACA has examined this aspect of private tubewell development and has found considerable variations due to reasons which include land tenure problems, electricity supplies, mechanical breakdowns, disputes over sale of water and fluctuations in surface supplies. IACA has found that acne-cusec well pumping for about 2,400 hours a year appears reasonably typical of the present situation. This pumping rate is equivalent to about 200 acre feet a year from each private tubewell. ANNEX 4.1 Page 35 2.37 IACA's projections for private tubewell development as an alternative in some project areas appear rather low. The Bank Group in its evaluation has made the following adjustments: (i) in a number of project areas the rate of private tubewell installations projected by IACA for the period prior to a possible public project would be maintained in the absence of public develop- ment given appropriate stimulation. INhilst in- creasing the rate of installation in keeping with this view, the Bank Group has, however, retained the ceiling introduced by IACA for private well in- stallations in each project area; (ii) for purposes of comparison the Bank Group has assumed that a maximum of 120 acres could be served by one private tubewell as compared with IACA's figure of 100 acres. IUhile this may overstate somewhat the average coverage provided by each private well, especially as density increases, it should be more representative of the possible total coverage though possibly at higher rates of installation and the acceptance of some over capacity and associated higher investment. This has been recognized in the Bank Group's evaluation by higher capital costs and O&M expenditures; (iii) the Bank Group has further assumed an annual average pumpage per tubewell of 225 acre feet compared with IACA's figure of 200 acre feet. The implied utiliza- tion rate of 30 percent as against IACA's of 27 per- cent would appear feasible but would represent an improvement over past performance which, in the Bank Group's opinion, can be anticipated in the absence of public development. 2.38 IACA's projections for the future rate of private tubewell installations were based on recent historical trends which came about with little public support and guidance and extended only over short periods. The Bank Group, in making the above adjustments, has departed from this approach and expects private tubewell development would be actively promoted in the absence of public development. In particular additional support for private groundwater development would be required in the form of technical advice and services, credit facilities, and counsel for cooperative use of private wells especially for smaller farms. ANNEX 4.1 Page 37 B. Review of IACA's Public Tubewell Project Proposals 1. The Shorkot-Kamalia Project (a) The Project 2.39 The project is located in the south western tip of the Rechna Doab (see Map ) and would provide additional irrigation supplies and water table control for 29,4000 acres CCA in the follow- ing canal commands: CCA Included Under the Project Canal Command Total CCA CCA of the Project ------- million acres)---------------- Haveli 0.14 0.14 Lower Chenab 2.83 0.12 Lower Bari Doab 1.58 0.03 TOTAL 4.55 0.29 The distribution of the groundwater quality is about as follows: Groundwater Quality Zones of the Project Groundwater Quality Project Area Zone Percent '000 Acres Less than 1,000 ppm TDS 76 222 1,000 to 3,000 ppm TDS 11 35 More than 3,000 ppm TDS 13 37 TOTAL 100 294 Over approximately 229,000 acres (78 percent of the project area) the water table is less than ten feet from the surface and one third of this acreage is effectively waterlogged (water table at depth of less than five feet). About 74,000 acres (25 percent of the project area) 1/ IACA Comprehensive Report, Volume 16, Annexure 15F. ANNEX 4.1- Page 38 are also affected by soil salinity and would require leaching. These conditions have retarded agricultural development in the project area which is one of the less advanced areas of the Rechna Doab. 2.40 Land tenure data are only available for the Shorkot District which covers most of the project area. The distribution of farm sizes and tenureship in this district is about as follows: Farm Size and Land Tenure Situation Percent Percent of Farm Size of Farms Farm Area Less than 5 acres 38 8 5 to 25 acres 52 58 Over 25 acres 10 34 Owner operated 30 29 Owner cum tenant 11 16 Tenant operated 59 55 The average farm size in the district, which would be roughly repre- sentative of the project area, is about 11.3 acres. 2.41 The project would increase the water availability in the project area from presently 0.59 MAF to 1.23 MAF at full development. Of the increase of 0.64 MAF about o.14 MAF would be additional surface supplies introduced after provision of tubewell drainage and some canal enlargement and 0.50 MAF would be provided by the tubewells to be installed under the project. This increase in irrigation supplies would be sufficient to support a growth in cropped acres from presently 271,000 acres (92 percent intensity) 1/ to 439,000 acres (149 percent intensity by 1985). (b) Physical lWorks 2.42 The physical works of the project would consist of the following: (i) the installation of 426 public tubewells over 257,000 acres CCA including 370 wells of four cusec capacity in the fresh groundwater zone (220,000 acres CCA) and 56 wells averaging 2.9 cusec capacity in the mixing zone (35,000 acres CCA); 1/ Perennials counted once only, if perennials are counted twice the cropping intensity would be 97 percent. ANNEX 4.1 Page 39 (ii) enlargement of canals serving 56,000 acres CCA supplying the saline and the mixing zones of the Haveli coimrands. The enlargement of distribution channels would be required to increase the cropping intensities in the mixing and saline groundwater zones. IACA has proposed that the enlargement of channels in the groundwater zone from 1,000 to 2,000 ppm TDS should be done by widening and deepening of existing channels. In the zones where groundwater salinity exceeds 2,000 ppm TDSo IACA recommends the construction of parallel canals. In the latter case the two canals would be operated as one large canal. No provision hay/been made for cross links to enable separate operation of each canal. - (c) Construction Schedule 2.43 The installation of the public tubewells would extend over three years in accordance with the following schedule: Preliminaryr Construction Schedule for Public Tubewells 1967/68 1968/69 1969/70 -----(No. of wells)--------- Drilling of wells and con- struction of structures 100 326 - Electrification - 100 326 Wells in operation 100 426 2.l44 Construction of the tubewell part of the project would be completed by the end of the Third Plan period. The enlargement of canals would take place between 1971 and 1973. The latter works would be phased in accordance with the projected growth of cropping intensities and the associated increase in watercourse requirements in the mixing and saline groundwater zones. In the groundwater quality zone from 1,000 to 2,000 ppm TDS diversion works would be required to maintain irrigation supplies during the enlargement of canals. The remaining canal improvements would be implemented during the annual canal closure periods. 1/ IACA has also proposed the implementation of a pilot tile drainage scheme in the saline groundwater zones of the project area between 1969 and 1971. However, this scheme has not been included under the project and should be treated as an exnerimental activity. ANINEX 4.1, Page 40- 2.45 Preparation of a SCARP project which includes the project apa has already been substantially completed by Tipton & Kalmbach, Inc. - The project proposed by IACA covers a substantially smaller area and since all relevant information has already been collected and processed it should be possible to begin construction of the project by the end of 1967 with very little, if any, additional investigations. (d) Cost Estimates and Expenditure Schedule 2.46 The total cost of the project is estimated by the Bank Group at about Rs. 88.2 million (18.6 million US$ equivalent). This would include the following: Summary Cost Estimates Local Currency Foreign Exchange Total -(______________ Rs. mill) ---------------- Project Preparation 1.8 1.4 3.2 Tubewells 9.9 14.3 24.2 Canal Enlargement 4.7 0.5 5.2 Electrification 6.5 10.0 16.5 Other Civil Works 6.3 1.0 7.3 Subtotal 29.2 27.2 56.4 Overheads 8.7 2.6 11.3 Contingencies 7.2 5.7 12.9 Subtotal 15.9 8.3 24.2 Interest during Construction 7.6 _ 7.6 TOTAL 52.7 35.5 88.2 Details of the cost estimates are given in Annex 1, page 1. The foreign exchange component of the project would be about 40 percent of total project costs or US$7.5 million equivalent. 1/ Tipton & Kalmbach, Inc. Project No. 5, Lower Rechna Doab, August 1966, (SCARP v). ANWTEX 4.1 Page 41 2.47 Expenditures would be spread over six years approximately in accordance with the following schedule: Summary Expenditure Schedule 1967/68 1968/69 1969/70 1970/71 1971/72 1972/73 ---------------- (Rs. mill) - -------------- Tubewells and Associated lWorks 14.6 38.2 2.1 - - Canal Enlarge- ment - - - - 2.9 3.0 Electrification - 6.5 20.9 - - TOTAL 14.6 44.7 23.0 - 2.9 3.0 A more detailed expenditure schedule is given in Appendix 1, page 2. (e) Recovery of Project Expenditures 2.48 On the basis of the above cost estimates a preliminary assess- ment has been made of the charges required to recover total project costs over the lifetime of the project. Including operation and maintenance expenditures the average annual rate of recovery would have to be about Rs. 11.4 million as shown below: Annual Costs for Operation, Main- tenance and Recovery of Capital Annual Costs (Rs. mill) Capital costs 1/ (Annuity at 6% over 20 years for Rs. 60.8 million) 5.3 Annual operation and maintenance costs 2/ (including repairs, electricity, and staff costs) 6.0 TOTAL 11. 1/ Based on recovery of project investment including project preparation and interest during construction but without costs of electrification. 2/ Average annual costs based on weighted average over lifetime of the project. ANNEX 4.1-. Page 42 2.49 This would be equivalent to about Rs. 39 per acre CCA or Rs. 26 per cropped acre at the stage of full development. Existing water rates average about Rs. 8 per cropped acre. Future water rates to recover total project costs including O&M plus existing charges for surface supplies would have to be in the neighborhood of Rs. 33 per cropped acre or about Rs. 51 per acre CCA. This would be about 14 per- cent of the expected net value of production in 1985. (f) The Irrigation Regime 2.50 The mean quantities of surface and groundwater which would be made available at various stages of development with the project and the comparison with the Irrigation water availability likely to prevail if no further private tubewells were installed after 1967 are summarized in the water budget attached as Appendix 2. Groundwater exploitation by existing private tubewells would be expected to discontinue following implementation of the project. The total water availability at water- course head under the public project would be about 1.23 MAF at the stage of full development. Of this 0.61 MAF would be provided by public tubewells and 0.62 MAF by canal supplies. Some 0.11 MAF of groundwater availability wsould substitute private exploitation, i.e. the net increase of groundwater availability due to the project would be 0.50 M4AF. Surface water availability wiould increase from 0.48 MAF to 0.62 MAF or by 0.14 MAF. The lowering of the water table to an average depth of ten feet in the early stages of the Project would require the permanent extraction of about 0.23 MAF of groundwater before additional surface supplies would be admitted into the project area. 2.51 For the project area as a whole, the water availability would be enhanced from 2.0 acre feet in 1965 to 4.2 acre feet per acre CCA in 1985. This would enable the increase of cropping intensity from 97 per- cent in 1965 to 149 percent at full delta as a weighted average for the project area. Canal capacity constraints in the Lower Chenab command would prevent maximum intensity from being achieved with full delta irrigation in the mixing zone. The intensity attainable there, accord- ing to IACA, would be about 125 percent. 2.52 As an alternative to the public tubewell project further irrigation development could take place through the continued in- stallation of private tubewells. The following table shows water availability and potential intensity growth as projected for these alternative forms of groundwater development. ANNEX 4.1 Page h3- Water Availability and Cropping Intensity 1975 and 1985 Under Alternative Forms of Groundwater Develonment 1-975 1985 Private Public Private Public Number of Wells 1,520 426 1,672 h/ 426 Surface Supplies (MAF) 0.48 0.60 0.48 0.62 Annual Pumpage (NAF) 0.34 0.53 0.38 0.61 Total Annual Water- ) course Delivery (NIAF) ) 0.82 1.13 0.86 1.23 Cropping Intensity (percent) 119 141 121 149 Acres Cropped ('000) 349 416 356 438 Acre-feet/acres cropped 2.3 2.7 2.h 2.8 1/ Private wells of one cusec capacity. This indicates that private groundwater development would not be capable of pumping morethan about 60 percent of the annual recharge. Because this is considered to provide insufficient water table control, no additional surface supplies would be admitted to the project area. Consequently the combined water availability under the private alter- native would support an intensity of only 121 percent at full delta or about 82,000 cropped acres less than public development. (g) Agricultural Development 2.53 The present level of agricultural productivity is low and further development is constrained by non-perennial and unreliable irrigation supplies, also by the high water table and fairly wide- spread salinity. The project area is situated in a part of the Rechna Doab climatically suited for cotton growing, hence this crop features prominently in the cropping pattern. Although conditions are not parti- cularly well suited for either coarse or fine rice, a sizeable quantity of the former is grown due to its tolerance of waterlogging and salinity. The main kharif crops are cotton, fodder, and coarse grain (jowar and bajra). The main rabi crop is wheat which accounts for over 60 percent of rabi acreage, the other important rabi crop is fodder. Sugarcane, a perennial, is also widely grown. Waterlogging and salinity have adverse effects on yields particularly cotton and kharif fodder. IACA's estimates indicate that the 1965 value of crop production was of the order of Rs. 39 million and livestock production Rs. 18.5 million, or a total GPV of Rs. 57.5 million. On average this would be about Rs. 196 per acre of CCA. ANNEX 4.1 Page 44 2.54 During the pre-project period agricultural development within the project area would be expected to continue the present trend. The number of private tubewells according to IACA would increase from about 380 in 1965 to about 460 in 1967. With the start of the project, private tubewell development would fall off and public wells would successively substitute private wells. The increased water availability under public tubewell development would support the following intensity growth: Growth of Cropped Acreage Under Public Development-i/ Cropped Acreage Year Intensity Percent '000 Acres 1965 97 285 1967 (start of project) 99 290 1975 141 416 1985 149 439 1/ Perennial crops counted twice. As stated above, cont inued private groundwater development would support a cropping intensity of only about 121 percent at full delta. 2.55 Assessments have been made by the Bank Group of the growth of agricultural production in the project area "with" public groundwater development as well as "without" additional water development. In accordance with the cropping intensity, cropping patterns and yield growth projected for the respective cases (for details see Appendices 3 and 4) the GPV and the production increments would be expected to develop about as follows: Growth of GPV "With" and "Without" Groundwater Development Incre- "Without" "With" mental Additional Groundwater the Project GPV Crops Livestock Total Crops Livestock Total Total -----------------------(Rs. mill)------------------------- 1965 39 19 58 39 19 58 - 1975 56 27 83 79 33 112 29 1985 79 36 115 134 61 195 80 ANNEX 4.1 Page 45 Over the life of the project the GPV would more than triple and the level ?f production would be about 170 percent of that of the "without" case. - The GPV per acre CCA would increase from Rs. 196 (see para 2.53) to Rs. 725 as compared to Rs. 425 per acre CCA in the "without" case. 2.56 As set forth in the Bank Group's Report, Volume II, Chapter VI, non-water input levels are expected to rise substantially throughout West Pakistan and thus appreciable increases in on-farm expenditures would be expected in both the "with" and "without" cases. To achieve the above projected growth of production, great efforts would have to be made to make available the quantities of non-water inputs required to sustain such growth. Allowing for the increased on-farm expenditures and associa- ted current project costs as well as the allocation of benefits to addi- tional surface water absorption the incremental net production value (NPV) for reference years would be expected to develop as follows: Incremental Net Benefits Attributable to Public Groundwater Development I/ 1975 1985 1988 ----------(Rs. mill)-------- NPV "with" 76 125 136 NPV "without" 57 7L 80 Incremental NPV 19 51 56 Allocation to surface water 4 11 12 Allowance for infrastructure and services 1 1 2 Increase in O& expenditures 4 L 4 Total Associated Costs 9 16 18 Incremental Net Benefits Attributable to the Project 10 35 38 1/ For details see Appendices 4 and 5, pages 1 and 2. 1/ Detailed projections of the GPV growth at constant prices for the "with" and "without" cases are given in Appendix 4, pages 1 and 2. ANNEX 4.1 Page 46 - A comparison against the alternative private development (see Appendix 6, pages 2 and 3) indicated that, after due allowance for all costs, the incremental net benefits attainable from the public project would be about twice that from continued private well installations. (h) Farmer Incentives 2.57 The benefits obtainable under the project should provide considerable incentives for the farmers. Based on ten acres CCA the farm income would be expected, on average, to improve as follows: Average Changes in Farm Income per 10 Acres of CCA Within the Project Area Under Alternative Forms of Development 1975 1985 1988 W/ount Private i P ublic Id/out Private Pui c W/out Private Public Cropping Intensity (percent) 99 119 141 99 121 149 99 121 149 GPV (Rs.) 2,830 3,296 3,788 3,912 5,102 6,626 4,267 5,574 7,246 On-Farm Expenditure (Rs.) 906 1,055 1,212 1,408 1,837 2,385 1,536 2,007 2,609 Water Charges 1/ (Rs.) 160 367 501 160 396 507 160 396 507 Total Current Expenditure (Rs.) 1,066 1,422 1,713 1,568 2,-233 2,892 1,696 2,403 3,116 Farm Income (Rs.) 1,764 1,874 2,075 2,344 2,869 3,734 2,571 3,171 4,130 1/ Water charges for the "Without" case consist of: (i) Surface water charges at Rs. 8 per acre cropped Rs. 79 (ii) O&M tubewells existing in 1966 (456 wells) Rs. 60 (iii) Amortization at 6 percent over 10 years for existing private wells Rs. 21 TOTAL Rs. 160 Water charges for full private tubewell development consist of: (i) Surface water charges at Rs. 8 per acre cropped Rs. 97 (ii) O&M for private tubewells Rs. 222 (iii) Amortization at 6 percent over 10 years for private wells Rs. 77 TOTAL Rs. 396 Water charges for public tubewell development at full development consists of the following: (i) Surface water charges at Rs. 8 per acre cropped Rs. 119 (ii) O&M and amortization at 6 percent over 20 years Rs. 388 TOTAL Rs. 507 AN'EX 4.1 Page 4L The results given in the above table are averages over the whole project area only. Individual farmers with private tubewells at their disposal would be expected to achieve and exceed the average farm incomes pro- jected under public development. However, because of limited coverage, less efficient distribution of groundwater, and no increased surface water supplies, the private alternative is not likely to increase farm incomes throughout the project area as much as appears attainable under the project. In absolute terms farmers' income with the public project would grow on average from Rs. 2,000 per farm of ten acres CCA in 1975 to more than Rs. 4,000 in 1988. This should be sufficiently attractive to enlist farmers' active cooperation under the project. (i) Project Evaluation 2.58 As discussed in Chapter II A above the Bank Group's evaluation of projects is based on a somewhat different approach than that of IACA. The evaluation results of the Bank Group and IACA are not strictly com- parable since IACA has related total incremental production to incre- mental costs only. The Bank Group has based its evaluation on attribu- table increments, after allocation of benefits to increased surface supplies, and total project costs. On the basis of the modifications made to the IACA evaluation procedures discussed in Chapter II A above, the Bank Group has assessed the likely results of the project as follows: Results of Project Evaluation - Public Project Incremental NPV (Rs. mill. present worth at 8 percent) 159 Benefit/Cost Ratio (at 8 percent) 2.2 Rate of Return: (a) exclusive of potential private savings 17% (b) inclusive of potential private savings 21% This compares to IACA's assessmentl/ of incremental NPV before alloca- tion of benefits to surface water of Rs. 401 million and 2 rate of return on incremental costs over the private expenditures only - of 50 percent. The calculations pertaining to the Bank Group's evaluation are given in Appendix 5. 1/ For details of IACA's evaluation see IACA Comprehensive Report, Volume 16, Annexure 15F, Chapter 4 (public project) and Appendix 1 (private alternative). 2/ As discussed in Chapter II A in its economic evaluation IACA has used incremental investment costs, i.e. the cost differential between case 1 and case 3. ANNEX 4.1 Page 49 2.59 The private alternative has also been evaluated by the Bank Group in accordance with the procedures discussed in Chapter II A above. On this basis and excluding the provision of additional surface water, continued private development would give a rate of return over 85 percent because of the considerably lower investment requirements. However, the incremental NPV attainable under the private alternative would be only about one-half that of the public project. Details of the evaluation of the private alternative are given in Appendix 6, pages 1 and 2. (j) Conclusion 2.60 While these results can only be indicative in the absence of a detailed appraisal the rate of return on total investments in the public project of about 17 percent after allowance for benefits attri- butable to increased surface supplies would appear satisfactory. Private tubewell development would appear capable of achieving a higher rate of return on investment than is likely to be attained with the public project. However, public development would make a substantially greater contribution to agricultural production than is presently feasible in the Shorkot-Kamalia area with continued private tubewell installations. 2.61 Because of the overriding need to accelerate growth of agri- cultural production in West Pakistan as rapidly as possible the Bank Group concludes that this area should be developed by means of a public tubewell project. Since project preparation is already well advanced it should be possible to commence construction towards the end of 1967. Immediate steps would need to be taken to reformulate and prepare the project for implementation on the basis of the detailed studies, investigations and designs already available. ANNEX 4.1 APPENDIX 1 Page 1 INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Shorkot-Kamalia Bank Group's Cost Estimates and Financial Requirements Local Currency Foreign Exchange 1/ Total 2/ (Rs. mill.) (Rs. mill.) (US$ Equiv.)- (Rs. mill.) (US$ Equiv.) PROJECT PREPARATION 1.8 1.4 0.29 3.2 0.67 TUBEWELL PROJECT: Tubewells 9.9 14.3 3.01 24.2 5.09 Appurtenant Structures 3.3 1.0 0.21 4.3 0.91 Watercourse Improvements 3/ 3.0 - - 3.0 0.63 Canal Enlargement 4.7 0.5 0.11 5.2 1.09 Duties and Taxes 4 2.4 - - 2.4 0.51 Engineering and Admin.5/ 2.3 1.6 0.34 3.9 0.82 Subtotal 65.6 7. 3.67 9.05 Contingencies - 5.1 3.5 0.74 8.6 1.81 TOTAL TUBEWELL PROJECT 30.7 20.9 4.41 51.6 10.86 ELECTRIFICATION: Distribution 5.3 8.2 1.72 13.5 2.84 Transmission 1.2 1.8 0.38 3.0 0.63 Duties and Taxes - 3.0 - - 3.0 0.63 Engineering and Admin.- 1.0 1.0 0.21 2.0 0.42 Subtotal 1675 I7-7D73 ZlS 4.5 Contingencies -/ 2.1 2.2 0.46 4.3 0.90 TOTAL ELECTRIFICATION 12.6 13.2 2.77 25.8 5.42 INTEREST DURING CONSTRUCTION: Tubewell Project / 6.o - - 6.o 1.26 Electrification 1.6 - - 1.6 0.34 TOTAL INTEREST 7.6 - 7.6 1.60 TOTAL FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS 52.7 35.5 7.47 88.2 18.57 1/ Rate of exchange used 1 : 4.75. 2/ Estimated at five percent direct costs before contingencies. 3/ Estimated at Rs. 10/acre CCA. TV Estimated at 15 percent of Foreign Exchange component of direct costs before engineering and administration. 5/ Estimated at ten percent of direct costs after duties and taxes. '/ Estimated at 20 percent of direct costs after duties and taxes. 7/ Estimated at six percent per annum for two-year period for each individual phase of tubewell construction. 8/ Estimated at six percent per annum for one year period. APPENDIX 1 Page 2 INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Shorkot-Kamalia Expenditure Schedule Based on Bank Group Estimates 1967/68 1968/69 1969/70 1970/71 1971/72 1972/73 Total -------------------------(Rs. million)--------------------------- Project preparation -/ 3.2 - _ _ _ - 3.2 Tubewells, structures and watercourses 7.4 24.1 - - - - 31.5 Duties and Taxes 0.5 1.7 - - - - 2.2 Engineering 0.9 3.0 - - - - 3.9 Contingencies 2.0 6.6 - - _ - 8.6 Subtotal 10.8 35.4 - - - - 46.2 Interest during Con- struction 0.6 2.8 2.1 - - - 5.5 Total Tubewell Project 11.4 38.2 2.1 - - - 51.7 Canal Enlargement Construction Costs - - - - 2.6 2.6 5.2 Custom Duties and Sales Taxes - - - - 0.1 0.1 0.2 Interest during Con- struction - - _ - 0.2 0.3 0.5 Total Canal Enlargement - - - - 2.9 3.0 5.9 Electrification - 3.9 12.6 - - - 16.5 Duties and Taxes - 0.7 2.3 - - - 3.0 Engineering and Admin- istration - 0.5 1.5 - - - 2.0 Contingencies _ 1.0 3.3 - - _ 4.3 Subtotal - 6.1 19.7 - - - 25.8 Interest during Con- struction - 0.4 1.2 - - - 1.6 Total Electrification - 6.5 20.9 - - - 27.4 TOTAL FINANCIAL REQUIRE- MENTS 14.6 44.7 23.0 - 2.9 3.0 88.2 1/ Incurred prior to beginning of construction. INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Shorkot-Kamalia Comparative Summary Water Budget "With" the Project and "Without" Additional Tubewells Net Increase 1965 1975 1965 "With" the Project "With" "Without" "With" "Without" the Additional the Additional Surface Ground- Existing Project Tubewells Project Tubewells Water water Total Surface supplies: Total: 0.48 0.60 0.48 0.62 0.48 0.14 -- 0.1-4 Thereof during October to May:!! 0.27 0.31 0.27 0.31 0.27 0.04 -- 0.04 2/ Groundwater supplies: 0.ll 0.53 0.12/ o.613/ 0.117 -_ 0.50 0.50 Total supplies: 0.59 1.13 0.59 1.23 0.59 0.14 0.50 o.64 1/ - Release period during which reservoirs would be operated for irrigation requirements. 0%:8 2 Based on IACA's figures of 380 private tubewells in operation in 1965 and an average utilization rate of J about 27 percent per annum. M This would includessubstitution for existing private groundwater exploitation (0.11 MAF) as well as those of further increase in private groundwater extraction. PUBLIC TUBEWELL PROJECT: SHORKOT KAMALIA WATER BALANCE AT ULTIMATE DEVELOPMENT (ALL FIGURES IN MAF) < CANAL >< WATER COURSE--O. < FIELD T I | / X~~~~~~~~~~~~~TANSPIRATION EVAPORATION I EVAPORATION I EVAPORATION 0.85 A ).0* N : A .06 | t ).1 RAIN t, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~007 w 0.77 0 62 1.23 1.11 0.78 >, USE RIVER RECHARGE RE- CHARGE IRRIGATION RECHARGE deRECHARGE PUMPING 0 61~ ~ 00 4W024M012S06100007 t0 226 GROUND WATER RESERVOIR DRAINAGE Z X PUMPING xa (R)IBRD -3330 cs INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Shorkot-Kamalia Yield Projections "With"l the Project (Maunds per Acre) Present IACA Projections Bank Group Projections 1965 1967 1975 1985 2000 1967 1975 1985 2000 Kharif: Coarse Rice 12.0 12.3 18.0 n.a. n.a. 12.5 16.4 n.a. n.a. Cotton 7.0 7.1 10.0 17.0 21.5 7.3 9.6 13.7 21.5 Maize 10.0 10.5 14.0 23.0 34.o 10.4 13.7 19.9 34.0 Fodder 180.0 190.0 270.0 390.0 500.0 187.2 246.6 344.5 500.0 Pulses 5.0 5.2 7.0 10.0 14.0 5.2 6.8 9.5 14.0 Groundnuts n.a. n.a. n.a. 30.0 40.0 n.a. n.a. 30.0 40.0 Jowar/Bajra 6.0 6.2 8.0 n.a. n.a. 6.2 8.2 n.a. n.a. Rabi: Wheat 10.5 1.8 17.0 26.5 32.5 10.9 14.4 23.4 32.5 Fodder 400.0 405.0 560.0 760.0 900.0 416.0 547.5 732.1 900.0 Oilseeds 6.0 6.1 7.5 Il.0 15.0 6.2 8.2 U1.0 15.0 Gram 7.0 7.1 9.0 14.0 18.0 7.3 9.6 13.2 18.0 Maize n.a. n.a. n.a. 23.0 34.0 n.a. n.a. 23.0 34.0 Pulses 5.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. Others 5.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 5.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. Perennials: Sugarcane (gur) 27.5 28.0 40.0 59.0 72.0 28.6 37.5 51.8 72.0 Fruit 80.0 80.0 70.0 130.0 170.0 80.0 102.0 1/ 130.0 170.0 Vegetables 140.0 140.0 170.0 200.0 250.0 140.0 170.0 200.0 250.0 JY Applies to the fruit bearing acreage only. mII INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Shorkot-Kamalia Yield Projections "Without" Additional Tubewells (Maunds per Acre) Present IACA Projections Bank Group Projections 1965 1967 1975 1985 2000 1967 1975 1985 2000 Kharif: Coarse Rice 12.0 12.3 12.8 19.0 30.0 12.5 16.4 24.3 43.8 Cotton 7.0 7.1 7.3 11.5 15.0 7.3 9.6 13.7 21.5 Maize 10.0 10.5 11.8 14.0 17.0 10.4 12.2 14.9 20.0 Fodder 180.0 190.0 210.0 250.0 320.0 187.2 219.4 267.5 360.0 Pulses 5.0 5.2 5.6 7.0 9.0 5.2 6.1 7.4 10.0 Jowar Bajra 6.0 6.2 6.5 7.5 9.5 6.2 7.3 8.9 12.0 Rabi: Wheat 10.5 11.8 13.0 16.5 21.0 10.9 14.b 23.h 32.5 Fodder 400.0 405.0 415.0 500.0 650.0 416.0 487.6 594.4 800.0 Oilseeds 6.0 6.1 6.2 7.5 10.0 6.2 7.3 8.9 12.0 Gram 7.0 7.1 7.3 10.0 12.9 7.3 8.6 10.5 14.1 Pulses 5.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Others 5.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Perennials: Sugarcane (gur) 27.5 28.0 30.0 40.0 51.0 28.6 37.5 51.8 72.0 Fruit 80.0 80.0 80.0 105.0 125.0 80.0 102.02/ 130.0 170.0 Vegetables 140.0 140.0 1h0.0 170.0 190.0 140.0 170.0 200.0 250.0 1/ Applies to fruit bearing acreage only. INUlS SPECIAL STUDy Public Tubevell Project - Shorkot-Ka-ma1ia Bank Group Projection of PrOduction nWith, theP e Coarse rice AcresdCropped Yid P Producto 1988 Croppe e Cotton s b,cc 30 144 (mds/acre. Coarserie 86,6o0 16. 1.268(00 -d 9.6 77b.h 2 6. 9 6p 108,700 13.7 2.6 . 8 1 02 2 . 0 3 Puloes 38,2o6 2466. 9,412.5 2,800 30 .910 201,300 3 Gb-ndnuts h,900 -72Y 33 6 29,800 292..5 58.4i3 17,h. 1,63327 a.g G aiPe 12,7U.6 1 1 , 22.2 326S 40 .035 On-F ses 5,00 . 0 5,900 91 1.37 1 9400 10.3 360. 6.037 T o t a l 8 6 ,7 0 0 3 0 . 0 2 0 1 .0 560 2 5 6 02.3 1 .26 2 Sbal: 7 8 6.5 676 52 1.1-9 176. 7 Sub~~~~tota1. 158,000 30.696 178,900 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~56 .330 61.90__Z R a b i : 0 . 9 1 7 8 , 9 0 07 0 Foheat 123,5 oo 16.64 1 , 778.6 23.111190 6 -0 Oiledde 37,600 5 67.5 2 0:-73. 3,00 73.79,6. Gram 11,000 8. 7.5 23.6 2,613.8 33.979 8 2 - ~ ~~~38,200 2796.321170 250 2,9.13.0 Maizeed 5oo90.2 2.120 1100 1. 27.096682 111,7000 11.9 1309.95 .7 5, 0 9.6 56.6 0 80 5,9000 1 3.2 70 1. 1 38,9021.o8 . 36 302 Green manure 2570 - - 80 5,loo 23. 28476. 9,4. Sub-total: 203,500o .29L2 - 0 117.3 2.170 5,100 26.' 1327. 2.135 Perennialj: 26. 046 201,300 2 , 0 Sugar 462.3 29130 Fruit 19,800 37 .5 I/ 762.5 1 -6 760 84 .1 6, 0 10 . 2 87 3.396 5:90 1 0. 911.7 16.411 17,600 55.6 975.0 1 . 5 Vegetables 2,900 1 702.0 930.07.2 0. ,8. 29059 0 291 2237 1.7 Sub-total: - 4 9-00 170.0 493. o _.~.h23 130.0 767.0 8.437 5,900 1372 09.5890 S u b - t o t s .~~~~~ . 2 7 , 1 0 0 2 2 . 1 8 6 9 , 0 _ ( 2 0 01 10 3 7 . 98 2 8 2 9 , 6 0 080 . 0 2 G P V o -f C r o p s 7 2 .8. 7 2 6 2 9 1 . 0 GPV of Animal Husbandr 78/72.6 60.82 5524o Total Gpv1137 192613 213.0256 On-Farm Costs 31/ 1 13 725.639 2 3 -5 Total Npv 7L5.63 7331 h1 70.133 76. 700 75-733 12h.68o ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~136.356 INlUJS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Shorkot KIamalia Bank Group Projection of Production "'Wlithout" the Project 1969 1975 1985 1988 Cropped Yields Production GPV Yields Production GPV Yields Production GPV Yields Production GPV Acres (mds/acre) ('000 mds) (Rs. mill) (mds/acre) ('000 mds) (Rs. mill) (mds/acre) ('000 mds) (Rs. mill) (mds/acre) ('000 mds) (Rs. mill Kharif: Coarse rice 14,700 13.0 191.1 2.006 16.4 241.1 2.532 24.3 357.2 3.751 27.3 4o013 4.214 Cotton 54,400 7.6 413.4 12.402 9.6 522.2 15.666 13.7 745.3 22.359 15.0 816.0 24.480 Maize 5,300 10.8 57.2 1.058 12.2 64.7 1.197 14.9 79.0 1.462 15.8 83.7 1.548 Fodder 23,500 194.8 4,577.8 - 219.4 5,155.9 - 267.5 6,286.2 - 283.9 6,671.6 - Pulses 2,100 5.4 11.3 0.237 6.1 12.8 0.269 7.4 15.5 0.326 7.9 16.6 0.349 Jowar/bajia 1,0 6.5 105.3 1.158 7.3 118.3 1.301 8.9 144.2 1.586 9.5 153.9 1.693 Sub-total: 116,200 16.861 20.965 29.484 32.284 Rabi: Wheat 91,100 11.4 1,038.5 13.500 14.4 1,311.8 17.053 23.4 2,131.7 27.721 25.0 2,277.5 29.608 Fodder 32,300 432.8 13,979.4 - 487.6 15,749.5 - 594.4 19,199.1 - 630.8 20,374.8 - Oilseeds 6,500 6.5 42.2 0.992 7.3 47.4 1.114 8.9 57.8 1.358 9.5 61.8 1.452 Gram 5,900 7.6 44.8 0.638 8.6 50.7 0.722 10.5 62.0 o.884 11.1 65.5 0.933 Sub-total: 135,800 15.130 18.889 29.963 31.993 Perennial: Sugar 16,200 29.7 481.1 8.660 37.5 607.5 10.935 5i.8 839.2 15.106 55.4 897.5 16.155 Fruit 1,500 86.6 129.9 1.429 102.02/ 308.7 3.396 130.0 195.0 2.145 137.2 205.8 2.264 Vegetables 1,200 151.5 181.8 2.000 170.0 204.0 2.244 200.0 240.0 2.640 209.1 250.9 2.760 Sub-total: 18,900 12.089 16.575 19.891 21.179 Total GPV Crops 440.80 56.429 79.338 85.456 Total GPV Animal Husbandry 2/ 22.500 26.800 35.700 40.000 Total GPV 66.580 83.229 115.038 125.456 On-Farm Costs 3/ 21.306 26.633 41.414 45.164 Total NFV 45.274 56.596 73.624 80.292 1/ Applies to fruit-bearing acreage only. 2/ Based on IACA Projection. 3/ 1969 - 32% of total GPV. 1975 = 32% of total GPV. 1985 = 36% of total GPV. 1988 - 36% of total GPV. INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project -- Shorkot Kamalia Calculation of Rate of Return Cost- of Incremental NPV OYM and Increoental Benefits R A T E 0 F a E T U R N NPV 'With" NPV "Without" Incremental Additional After Allocation to Infrastructure Power Attributable Potential Including Potential Capital Costo Net benefits Project Costo rear ProJect Project NPV Surface Water Surface 'Water end Services 2/ Coste Increment Private Savings Private Savings of Project at 17% 3/ at 21% / at 17% 3/ at 21% 4/ ---------------------------- (Rs. Million) -----____________________ 1967 - - - - - - - - 2.5 2.5 13.5 - 2.1 13.6 fl-. 1968 65.o 45.0 -- - - - 2.5 2.5 33.7 - 1.7 26.2 23.0 1969 69.7 45.3 4.4 - 4-4 0.15 1.70 2.7 2.5 5.2 - 1.8 2.9 - - 1970 56.7 47.0 7.7 - 7.7 0.27 6.3o 1.4 2.5 3.9 - 0.8 1.8 - - 1971 59.4 48.8 10.6 0.8 9.8 0.34 6.04 3.4 2.5 5.9 2.5 1.7 2.3 1.7 1.0 1972 63.8 5o.6 13.2 2.0 11.2 0.39 6.04 4.8 2.5 7.3 2.5 2.0 2.3 1.5 o.8 1973 67.6 52.5 15.1 2.7 12.4 o.43 6.04 5.9 2.5 8.4 - 2.2 2.2 - - 1974 71.2 54.5 16.7 3.3 13.4 o.47 6.04 6.9 2.5 9.4 - 2.2 2.0 - - 1975 75.7 56.6 19.1 4.2 14.9 0.52 6.04 8.3 2.5 10.8 - 2.3 1.9 - - 1976 80.1 58.1 22.0 4.7 17.3 0.61 5.60 11.3 2.5 13.8 - 2.7 2.0 - - 1977 84.5 59.7 24.8 5.2 19.6 0.69 5.61 13.3 2.5 15.8 - 2.7 1.9 - - 1978 89.1 61.3 27.8 6.2 21.6 0.76 5.78 15.0 2.5 17.5 - 2.7 1.8 - - 1979 94.0 62.9 31.1 6.8 24.3 o.85 6.04 17.4 2.5 19.9 - 2.7 1.7 - - 1980 98.8 64.6 34.2 7.3 26.9 o.94 6.04 19.9 2.5 22.4 - 2.6 1.5 - - 1981 103.5 66.6 37.1 7.8 29.3 1.03 6.04 22.2 2.5 24.7 - 2.6 1.6 - - 1982 108.3 68.1 40.2 8.4 31.8 1.ll 6.04 24.6 2.5 27.1 - 2.5 1.3 - - 1983 113.3 70.0 43.3 9.7 33.6 1.18 6.04 26.6 2.5 28.9 - 2.3 1.1 - - 1986 218.5 71.8 46.7 10.4 36.3 1.27 6.04 29.0 2.5 31.5 - 2.2 1.0 - - 1985 124.7 73.6 51.1 11.2 39.9 1.40 6.04 32.5 2.5 35.0 - 2.1 0.9 - - 1986 128.6 75.8 52.6 1l.5 41.1 1.44 6.04 33.6 2.5 36.1 - 1.9 0.8 - - 1987 132.3 78.0 54.3 11.9 42.9 1.50 6.04 35.6 2.5 37.9 - 1.7 0.7 - - 1988 136.4 80.3 56.1 12.3 43.8 1.53 6.04 36.2 2.5 38.7 - 1.5 o.6 _ _ Rate of R6turn 17S 43.2 35.9 43.0 35.9 Rate of Return _/X21S / Charged at average value per acre foot of total incremental water availability: Incremental Value/Acre Foot Incremental Water of Incremental NPV Availabilty Availability (Rs.Mill.) (MAF) (Rs.) 1971 io.6 0.268 42.7 13 1975 19.1 0.539 35.6 1980 34.2 0.611 56.0 1985 51.1 0.638 80.1 Absorption of surface water based on interpolation of IACA water budget data. 2/ Allowance for public expenditures on infrastructure and intensified technical and advisory services. The allowance includes: 1.85% of attributable increment for roads. 1.65% of attributable increment for supporting services. Charged on incremental NPV after allocation to surface water. 3/ Excluding Potential Private Savings. 6/ Including Potential Private Savings. APPENDIX 5 Page 2 INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Shorkot-Kamalia Benefit:Cost Ratio Incremental NPV Project Costs Including Discounted at 8% after Allocation 0 & M Services Year to Surface Water and Infrastructure Benefits Costs ------------------------------(Rs. mill)------------------------------ 1/ 2/ 1/ 2/ 1967 _ 13.5 11.0 - 12.5 10.2 1968 - 33.7 31.2 - 28.9 26.7 1969 4.4 1.7 - 0.8 3.5 1.3 - 0.6 1970 7.7 6.3 3.8 5.7 4.6 2.8 1971 9.8 8.9 6.4 6.7 6.1 4.4 1972 11.2 8.9 6.4 7.1 5.6 4.0 1973 12.4 6.5 4.0 7.2 3.8 2.3 1974 13.4 6.5 4.0 7.2 3.5 2.2 1975 14.9 6.6 4.1 7.5 3.3 2.1 1976 17.3 6.0 3.5 8.0 3.1 1.7 1977 19.6 6.3 3.8 8.4 2.9 1.6 1978 21.6 6.6 4.1 8.6 2.7 1.6 1979 24.3 6.9 4.4 8.9 2.5 1.6 1980 26.9 7.0 4.5 9.1 2.4 1.5 1981 29.3 7.1 4.6 9.2 2.2 1.5 1982 31.8 7.2 4.7 9.3 2.1 1.4 1983 33.6 7.2 4.7 9.1 1.9 1.3 1984 36.3 7.3 4.8 9.1 1.8 1.2 1985 39.9 7.h 4.9 9.3 1.7 1.1 1986 41.1 7.5 5.0 8.8 1.6 1.1 1987 42.9 7.5 5.0 8.5 1.5 1.0 1988 43.8 7.6 5.1 8.1 1.4 0.9 159.3 97.4 71.6 B/C ratio 2/ at 8% = 1.6 B/C ratio 32/ at 8% = 2.2/ 1/ Before deduction of potential private savings. 2/ After deduction of potential private savings; consistent with IACA approach. 3/ If potential private savings are added to the benefit stream rather than netted out from the cost stream the B/C ratio would be 1.9 as follows: Present Worth of Benefit: 159.3 Present Worth of Savings: 25.8 185.1 B/C ratio 1851 = 1.9 INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Shorkot-Kamalia Private Alternative - Rate of Installation and Incremental Water Availability Number of Increase in Private Incremental?! Wells in 'Wells During Project Replacement of Incremental Number Water Availability Year Operation Period Additional Wells Of Wells in Operation (MAF) 1965 380 1966 456 1967 547 91 91 0.02 1968 656 109 200 0.05 1969 787 131 331 0.07 1970 944 157 488 0.11 1971 1,038 94 582 0.13 1972 1,142 104 686 0.15 1973 1,256 114 800 0.18 1974 1,382 126 926 0.21 1975 1,520 138 1,064 0.24 1976 1,672 152 1,216 0.27 1977 1,672 91 1,216 0.27 1978 1,672 109 1,216 0.27 1979 1,672 131 1,216 0.27 1980 1,672 157 1,216 0.27 1981 1,672 194 1,216 0.27 1982 1,672 104 1,216 0.27 1983 1,672 114 1,216 0.27 1984 1,672 126 1,216 0.27 1985 1,672 138 1,216 0.27 1986 1s672 152 1,216 0.27 1987 1,672 91 1,216 0.27 1988 1,672 109 1,216 0.27 1/ Rate of installation: 20% p.a. compound growth between 1965 and 1970. This rate of installation accepts the 10% p.a. compound growth between 1970 and 1976. ceiling for coverage with private tube- HIt | wells stated in the IACA project report. Q 4 2/ Assumed rate of average utilization: 30% lo) Each well would pump for about 2,630 hours and produce 225 acre feet per annum. INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Shorkot-Kamalia Estimate of Incremental NPV of Private Tubewell Alternative Acreage Cropped Expansion of Acreage Cropped Acreage Cropped Overall Intensity NPV of Private NPV Incremental Receiving AddZ;. Acreage Crogped Under "With" Under "Without" Alternative "Without" NPV Year Water (I00O)_/ ('00) 2, Condition ('000) Condition (3000) Acres % (Rs. mill.)2/ (Rs. mill.) (Rs. mill.) 1967 9.1 4.9 14.0 280.7 294.7 100 45.4 44.6 0.8 1968 20.0 12.9 32.9 269.8 302.7 103 47.0 450. 2.0 1969 33.1 16.8 49.9 256.7 306.6 104 48.0 45.3 2.7 1970 48.8 27.1 75-9 241.0 316.9 108 51.4 47.0 4.4 1971 58.2 31.9 90.1 231.6 321.7 109 54.0 48.8 5.2 1972 68.6 36.4 105.0 221.2 326.2 111 56.5 50.6 5.9 1973 80.0 44.3 124.3 209.8 334.1 114 59.6 52-5 7.1 1974 92.6 51.9 144.5 197.2 341.7 116 62.8 54.5 8.3 1975 106.4 59.1 165.5 183.4 348.9 119 65.9 56.6 9-3 1976 121.6 66.0 187.6 168.2 355.8 121 69.4 58.1 11.3 1977 121.6 66.0 187.6 168.2 355.8 121 71.9 59.7 12.2 1978 121.6 66.0 187.6 168.2 355.8 121 74.6 61.3 13.3 1979 121.6 66.0 187.6 168.2 355.8 121 77.2 62.9 14.3 1980 121.6 66.0 187.6 168.2 355.8 121 80.1 64.6 15-5 1981 121.6 66.0 187.6 168.2 355.8 121 83.0 66.4 16.6 1982 121.6 66.0 187.6 168.2 355.8 121 86.1 68.1 18.0 1983 121.6 66.0 187.6 168.2 355.8 121 89.2 70.0 19.2 1984 121.6 66.0 187.6 168.2 355.8 121 92.5 71.8 20.7 1985 121.6 66.0 187.6 168.2 355.8 121 96.0 73.6 22.4 1986 121.6 66.0 187.6 168.2 355.8 121 98.9 75.8 23.1 1987 121.6 66.0 187.6 168.2 355.8 121 101.8 78.0 23.8 1988 121.6 66.0 187.6 168.2 355.8 121 104.9 80.3 24.6 1/ Based on existing water depth of 2.1 acre feet on historical intensity. 2/ Expansion in addition to historical intensity of full delta (2.8 acre feet). M 3/ Estimated by adding NPV/acre cropped of acreage cropped, continuing with underwatering ("without" condition) to NPV/acre cropped of acreage cropped at full delta ("with" condition). INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Shorkot Kamalia Evaluation of Private Tubewell Alternative Benefit/Cost Ratio Rate of Return Incremental InfrastructpMe 0&M Capital Total Benefits Costs Benefits Costs Year NPV & Servicegl Costs at 8% at 8% at 88% at 88% 1967 0.8 - 0.4 09 1.3 0.7 1.2 0.h 0.7 1968 2.0 0.1 0.8 1.1 2.0 1.7 1.7 O.6 0.6 1969 2.7 0.1 1.3 1.3 2.7 2,1 2.1 O.h 0.4 1970 4.4 0.2 1.9 1.6 3.7 3.2 2,7 0.4 0.3 1971 5.2 0.2 203 0.9 3.4 3e5 2.3 0.2 Ol 1972 5.9 0.2 2.7 1.0 309 3o7 2.5 0.1 0.1 1973 7.1 0.2 3.1 1.1 4.4 4.1 2.6 0.1 0.1 1974 8.3 0.3 3.6 1.3 5.2 4.5 2.8 0.1 0.0 1975 9.3 0.3 I1 4 5.8 4.7 2.9 - - 1976 11.3 0.4 14.7 1.5 6,6 5.2 3.1 - - 1977 12.2 Oe4 4.7 0.9 6.0 5.2 2.6 - - 1978 13.3 0.5 4.7 1l1 6.3 5.3 2.5 - - 1979 1413 0.5 4Io7 1.3 6.5 5.3 2.4 - - 1980 15.5 0.5 4o7 1.6 6.8 5,3 2.3 - - 1981 16.6 o.6 4.7 0°9 6,2 5.2 2.0 - - 1982 18.0 o.6 4I7 1.0 6.3 5.3 108 - - 1983 19.2 0.7 4.7 1i1 6.5 5.2 1.8 - - 1984 20.7 0.7 4.7 103 6.7 5.2 1.7 - - 1985 22.4 0.8 4.7 i.hl 6.9 5.2 1.6 - - 1986 23.1 0.8 4.7 1.5 7.0 5.0 1.5 - - 1987 23.8 0.8 4.7 0.9 6.4 4.7 1.3 - - 1988 24.6 0.9 4.7 1.1 6.7 4.5 1.2 - - 94.9 46.5 2.3 2*3 B/C Ratio at 8%- 2.0 Rate of Return - 88% 1/ Based on a charge of 3.5% of incremental NPV as under public tubewell program, Based on assumed average annual O&M costs per tubewell of Rs. 3,900. 0-4 / Based on average cost of tubewell of Rs. 10,000 and assumed rate of installation ANNEX h4 1 Page 51 2. The Rohri North Project - (a) The Project 2.62 The project is located in the Lower Indus Region on the left bank of the Indus River immediately south of the on-going Khairpur tube- well project (see Map). It would provide additional irrigation supplies and water table control for 598,000 acres of Commanded Culturable Area (CCA). The project area covers that part of the Rohri canal command between the Khairpur canal command in the north and the line of the pro- posed Sehwan Barrage Feeder in the south which is underlain by usable groundwater. It also includes beyond this southern line such land as would not be commanded by gravity from the proposed Sehwan Feeder, (see Chapter V, Volume II). Groundwater Quality Zones of the Project Groundwater Quality Project Area Zone Percent '000 Acres Less than 1,000 ppm TDS 75 451 1,000 to 2,000 ppm TDS 25 147 TOTAL 100 598 Over approximately 240,000 acres (40 percent of the project area) the water table is less than ten feet from the surface. 2.63 Land tenure data have been collected for the whole of the Rohri North command by the LIP consultants.7 For the Nawabshah District, which includes the Rohri North project area, distribution of farm sizes and tenure is about as follows: 1/ See also IACA Comprehensive Report, Volume 20, Annexure 15J. 2/ Lower Indus Report, SRV9. ANuNEX 4.1 Page 52 Farm Size and Tand Tenure Situation Percent Percent of Farm Size of Farms Farm Area Less than 5 acres 21 h 5 to 25 acres 61 48 Over 25 acres 18 48 Owner operated 18 27 Owner cum tenant 8 12 Tenant operated 7h 61 2.64 The average owner-operated farm size in the area is about 21 acres. Less than half the farms and the culturable area, however, is owner-operated, the average size of tenant-operated farm being 11.4 acres. Limited growth of private tubewell installations, as well as the generally low standards of farming have been attributed by IACA in part to the effects of the existing land tenure organization, under which 74 percent of the farms and 60 percent of the farm area are operated by share cropping tenants. 2.65 The project proposal contains the installation of 1,530 public tubewells. The drainage effects of these tubewells would enable the introduction of additional and more reliable surface water supplies. The project would increase the water availability from 1.47 MAF in 1965 to 2.92 MAF at full development. Of the increased water availability of 1.45 MALF about 1.19 MAF would be additional groundwater and 0.26 MAF increased surface supplies. Only about nine percent of the project area is severely affected by salinity and the projected cropping intensities would be attained without reclamation of the severely saline lands. The water table control provided by the project tubewells and full delta cropping should eliminate any salt hazard in the rest of the area during the early years of the project. The availability of total additional irrigation supplies of 1.45 MAF would support an increase in annually cropped acreage from 568,000 acres in 1965 to 867,000 acres in 1985. (b) Physical lWorks 2.66 The physical works of the project would consist of the in- stallation of 1,530 1 public tubewells and appurtenant structures. This would include 1,150 wells with an average capacity of three cusecs 1/ Another 50 tubewells would be required to provide sufficient capacity for recharge pumping once canal remodelling, scheduled for the Fifth Plan period, has been completed. These wells have not been included in this review though their installation as part of the tubewell project may be considered. ANNEX 4.1 Page 53 in the fresh groundwater zone of the project area (covering 451,000 acres) and 380 wells with an average capacity of two cusecs in the mixing area (147,000 acres CCA). (c) Construction Schedule 2.67 The installation of the public tubewells would extend over approximately six years in accordance with the following schedule: Construction Schedules as Proposed by IACA 1967/68 1968/69 1969/70 1970/71 1971/72 1972/73 ------------------(No. of wells)-------------------- Drilling and Con- struction 140 360 360 360 310 - Electrification - 140 360 360 360 310 Wells in Operation - 140 500 860 1,220 1,530 In accordance with the Action Program as discussed in Volume II, Chapter IV implementation of the project would be delayed by about one year, but would otherwise follow the above schedule. Construction would thus be completed by about the middle of the Fourth Plan period. l/ 2.68 Detailed project preparation is presently underway in WAPDA with the help of a project planning group retained from the former LIP consultants. Completion of project design is expected towards the end of Fiscal Year 1966/67 and the project should be ready for implementa- tion as now scheduled. (d) Cost Estimates and Expenditure Schedule 2.69 The total cost of the project has been estimated by the Bank Group at about Rs. 232.2 million, equivalent to US$ 48.9 million. This would include the following: l/ As stated before, the increase in annual recharge brought about by enlargement would require the installation of 50 additional tubewells of two cusec capacity. IACA has included these wells in its con- struction schedule but excluded them from the project evaluation since they would form part of the remodelling project. In the Bank Group's review these 50 wells have also been excluded, though their installa- tion as part of the tubewell project should be considered as stated in para 2.66. ANNEX 4.1 Page 54- Summary Cost Estimates Local Currency Foreign Exchange Total ------------ (Rs. mill)---- Project Preparation 4.5 4-. 8.5 Tubewells 29.4 42.3 71.7 Electrification 18.1 28.2 h6.3 Other Civil Works 19.3 2.0 21.3 Subtotal 71.3 76.5 147.8 Overheads 23.3 7.2 30.6 Contingencies 18.0 15.8 33.8 Subtotal 41.3 23.0 6h.4 Interest during Construction 20.0 - 20.0 TOTAL 132.6 99.5 232.2 2.70 Details of the cost estimates are given in Appendix 1. .The foreign exchange component of the project would be about 43 percent of total project costs or US$ 20.9 million equivalent. 2.71 Expenditures would be spread over six years approximately, in accordance with the following schedule: Summary Expenditure Schedule Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 --------------- (Rs. mill7 ------_---------- Tubewells and Associated Works 21.3 33.5 34.6 3h.6 30.0 1.6 Electrification - 7.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 15.5 TOTAL 21.3 h0.5 52.6 52.6 48.0 17.1 A more detailed expenditure schedule is given in Appendix 1, page 2. ANNEX 4.1 Page- -55 (e) Recovery of Project Expenditures 2.72 On the basis of the above cost estimates a preliminary assess- ment has been made of the charges required to recover the total costs of this project over its lifetime. Including operation and maintenance expenditures the average annual rate of recovery would have to be about Rs. 25.8 million as shown below: Annual Costs for COeration, Hlaintenance, and Recovery of Capital Annual Costs (Rs. mill) Capital Costs -/ (Annuity at 6% over 20 years for Rs. 155.6 million) 13.6 Annual operation and maintenance costs 2/ (including repairs, electricity and staff costs) 12.2 TOTAL 25.8 1/ Based on recovery of investment in tubewell projects only, including project preparation and interest during construction, but not including costs of electrification. 2/ Average annual costs based on weighted average over lifetime of the project. 2.73 This would be equivalent to about Rs. 43 per acre CCA or Rs. 30 per cropped acre at the stage of full development. Existing water rates average Rs. 7 per cropped acre. To recover these, plus total project costs including O&M expense, future water rates will have to be in the neighbor- hood of Rs. 37 per cropped acre or about Rs. 53 per acre CCA. This would be about 12 percent of the expected net value of production per cropped acre in 1985. (f) The Irrigation Regime 2.74 The mean quantities of surface and groundwater which would be made available at various stages of development with the project and the comparison with the irrigation water availability likely to prevail if no further private tubewells were installed after commencement of con- struction are summarized in the water budget attached as Appendix 2. ANNEX 4.1 Page 56 Groundwater exploitation by existing private tubewells would be expected to discontinue following implementation of the project. The total water availability at watercourse heads under the public project would be about 2.92 MAF at the stage of full development. Of this 1.21 MAF would be provided by public tubewells and 1.71 MAF by canal supplies. Some 0.02 MAF of groundwater availability would substitute private exploitation, i.e. the net increase of groundwater availability due to the project would be 1.19 MAF. Surface water availability would increase from 1.45 MAF to 1.71 M1AF or by 0.26 MAF. The lowering of the water table to an average depth of ten feet in the early stages of the project would require the permanent extraction of about 0.1 MAF of groundwater before additional surface supplies would be admitted into the project area. 2.75 For the project area as a whole, the water availability wculd be enhanced from 2.5 acre-feet in 1965 to 4.9 acre-feet per acre CCA in 1985. This would enable the increase of cropping intensity from 95 percent in 1965 to 145 percent at full delta in 1985 or an increase in cropped acreage of about 300,000 acres. 2.76 As an alternative to the public tubewell project further irrigation development could take place through the continued installa- tion of private tubewells. The following table shows water availability and potential intensity growth as projected for these alternative forms of groundwater development. Water Availability and Cropping Intensity 1975 and 1985 Under A]ternative Forms of Groundwater Development 1975 1985 Private Public Private Public Number of wells 2,200 - 1,530 - 2,200 - 1,530 Surface supplies (MAC) 1.45 1.27 1.45 1.71 Annual pumpage (MAF) 0.50 1.07 0.50 1.21 Total annual watercourse delivery (MAF) 1.95 2.34 1.95 2.92 Cropping intensity (percent) 112 120 110 145 Acres cropped 3/ ('000) 669 718 658 867 Acres feet/acres cropped 2.9 3.3 3.0 3.4 1/ Private wells of one cusec capacity. 2/ Excluding the 50 wells required after canal enlargement. 3/ Perennial crops counted twice. ANNEX 4.1 Page $7 This indicates that private groundwater development would not be capable of pumping more than about 50 percent of the annual recharge. Because this is considered to provide insufficient water table control, no additional surface supplies would be admitted to the project area. Con- sequently the combined water availability under the private alternative would support an intensity of only 110 percent at full delta or about 210,000 cropped acres less than public development. (g) Agricultural Development 2.77 The present level of agricultural productivity is low. An important factor affecting this situation is the high percentage of absentee landowners who have sharecroppers tilling the land. The greater part of the area is devoted to subsistence farming although a portion of the landowner's share of the crops finds its way to the market. How- ever, as more water supplies became available an increasing acreage would be devoted to cash-cropping and wTith the introduction of improved inputs and better husbandry practices substantial improvements in agricultural production would be expected in the project area. 2.78 The cropping intensity in the project area in 1965 was estimated to be about 95 percent. The main kharif crops are cotton, fodder and coarse grains. The main rabi crops are wheat and oilseeds, with fodder and gram of secondary importance. The proportion of cropped acreage devoted to the perennial crops of sugarcane, fruit, and vegetable is about 15 percent, which is above average for the Lower Indus region. The estimated value of crop production in 1965 was Rs. 91.3 million, and of livestock production Rs. 32.4 million, giving a total GPV of Rs. 123.7 million (Rs. 207 per acre of CCA). 2.79 During the pre-project period agricultural development within the project area would be expected to continue the present trend. The number of private tubewells according to IACA would increase from about 100 in 1965 to about 180 in 1967. With the start of the project, private tubewell development would fall off and public wells would successively substitute existing private wells. The increased water availability under public tubewell development would support the following intensity growth. Growth of Cropped Acreage Under Public Development Cropped Acreage 1/ Year Intensity (%) (1000 acres) 1965 95 568 1967 (start of project) 96 57h 1975 120 718 1985 1h5 867 1/ Perennial crops counted twice. ANNEX 4.1 Page 5B As stated above, continued private groundwater development would support a cropping intensity of only about 110 percent at full delta. 2.80 Assessments have been made by the Bank Group of the growth of agricultural production in the project area "with" public groundwater development as well as "without" additional water development. In accordance with the cropping intensity, cropping patterns and yield growth projected for the respective cases (for details see Appendices 3 and 4) the GPV and the production increments would be expected to develop about as follows: Growth of GPV "With" and "W1ithout" Groundwater Developments Incre- "Without" "With" mental Additional Groundwater the Project GPV Crops Livestock Total Crops Livestock Total Total _________________________ Rs m-ill) ----------------------_____ 1965 91 32 124 91 32 124 - 1975 125 47 172 167 58 225 53 1985 172 69 241 297 111 408 167 Over the life of the project the GPV would more than triple and the level of production would be about 170 percent of that of the "without" case. 1' The GPV per acre CCA would increase from Rs. 207 (see para 2.78) to Rs. 682 as compared to Rs. 403 per acre CCA in the "without" case. 2.81 As set forth in the Bank Group's report Volume II, Chapter VI, non-water input levels are expected to rise substantially throughout West Pakistan and thus appreciable increases in on-farm expenditures would be expected in both the "with" and "without" cases. To achieve the above projected growth of production great efforts would have to be made to make available the quantities of non-water inputs required to sustain such growth. Allowing for the increased on-farm expenditures and associated current project costs as well as the allocation of benefits to additional surface water absorption the incremental net production value (NPV) for reference years would be expected to develop approximately as follows over the lifetime of the project. 1/ Detailed projections of the GPV growth at constant prices for the "with" and "without" cases are given in Appendix 4, pages 1 and 2. ANNEX 4.1 Page 59 Incremental Net Benefits Attributable to Public Groundwater Development I/ 1975 1985 1989 -------(Rs. mill)----= NPV "with" 152 261 282 NPV "without" 117 154 168 Incremental NPV 35 107 114 Allocation to surface water - 19 21 Allowance for infrastructure and services 1 3 3 Increase in 0O& expenditures 10 11 11 Total Associated Costs 11 33 35 Incremental Net Benefits Attributable to the Project 24 74 79 1/ For details see Appendix 4, pages 1 and 2, and .Appendix,5, .pages 1 and 2. A comparison against the alternative private development (see Appendix 6, pages 2 and 3) indicated that, after due allowance for all costs, the incremental net benefits attainable from the project area at full development would be about three times that from continued private well installations. 2.82 However, one of the features of the Rohri North project area is the relatively large area of fresh groundwater (less than 1,000 ppm TDS) at a depth of ten feet or more below the surface. IACA estimates that 227,000 acres, or 38 percent of the project CCA, fall in this category. An almost equal area of fresh groundwater, or 37 percent of CCA, lies at shallower depths up to ten feet. The IACA Comprehensive Report indicates that the deeper fresh groundwater areas lie in two sizeable blocks within the project area. These appear to be areas where the dangers of waterlogging are not present, and where mixing is not required. There should thus be less need for a carefully integrated public program to develop the groundwater resources, and fewer technical com- plications arising from private development of tubewells. 2.83 The IACA report estimates that 1,150 public tubewells in the fresh groundwater zones would serve a CCA of 451 thousand acres. This is slightly less than 400 acres per average tubewell of three cusecs. Assuming that private tubewell development could serve an area of ANNEX 4.1 Page 6b approximately 220,000 acres this would eliminate the need for, say, 560 public tubewells, or about one-third of the total number of tube- wells estimated for the project area as a whole. The substitution of private for public investment in the deeper fresh groundwater areas might therefore, in rough order of magnitude, result in savings of Rs. 50 million or more, equivalent to one-third the cost of the tube- well project. 2.8b Preliminary consideration of the prospects on grounds such as these suggests there is a genuine alternative opportunity for initial development through reliance on private sector investment in parts of the Rohri North project area. The assessment of costs and benefits, cited above, shows a favorable return on such investment, and the ex- perience in the Punjab has shown that the private sector is capable of rapid and efficient development in areas where the groundwater condi- tions are favorable. Measures to stimulate private sector efforts would need to insure a vigorous response to such opportunities on the part of private investors. For the reasons given above the Bank Group would suggest that careful consideration be given in the process of project preparation to the initial limitation of public development to the hydro- logically more difficult parts of the project area. Similarly land tenure conditions and water distribution procedures within watercourses should be studied to ascertain whether continued private tubewell in- stallations would be a feasible alternative for initial development in the fresh groundwater areas in the Rohri North command. (h) Farmer Incentives 2.85 The benefits obtainable under the project should provide con- siderable incentives for the farmers. Based on ten acres CCA the farm income would be expected on average to improve as follows: Comparison of Changes in Farm Income per 10 Acres of XA Under Alternative Forms of Development 1975 1985 1988 W/out Private Public W/out Private Public 17out Private Public Cropping Intensity (percent) 96 112 120 96 110 145 96 no 144 GPV (Rs.) 2,880 3,411 3,751 4,030 4,868 6,817 4,391 5,286 7,382 On-Farm Expenditure (Rs.) 922 1,087 1,201 1,451 1,753 2,454 1,581 1,903 2,658 Water Charges - (Rs.) 83 271 515 83 270 533 83 270 533 Total Current Expenditure (Rs.) 1,005 1,358 1,716 1,534 2,083 2,987 1,664 2,173 3,191 Farm Income (Rs.) 2053 2,035 2,496 2,045 3,830 2,727 3,113 4,191 1/ Water charges for the "Without" case consist of: (i) Surface water charges at Rs. 7 per acre cropped Rs. 67 (ii) O&M tubewells existing in 1967 Rs. 12 (iii) Amortization of 6 percent over 10 years for existing private wells Rs. 4 TOTAL Rs. 83 Water charges for full private tubewell development consist of: (i) Surface water charges at Rs. 7 per acre cropped Rs. 77 (ii) O&M for private tubewells Rs. 143 (iii) Amortization at 6 percent over 10 years for private wells Ps. 50 TOTAL Rs. 270 Water charges for public tubewell development at full development consists of the following: (i) Surface water charges at Rs. 7 per acre cropped Rs. 102 d (ii) O&M and amortization at 6 percent over 20 years Rs. 431 a TOTAL Rs. 533 F ANENX 4.1 Page 62 The results given in the above table are averages over the whole project area only. In absolute terms farmers' income with the public project would grow on average from about Rs. 2OOO per farm of ten acres CCA in 1975 to more than Rs. 4,000 over the life of the project. This should be sufficiently attractive to enlist farmers' active cooperation under the project. Individual farms with private tubewells at their disposal would be expected to achieve and exceed the average farm incomes pro- jected under public development. However, because of limited coverage, less efficient distribution of groundwater, and no increased surface water supplies, the private alternative is not likely to increase farm incomes throughout the project area as nmuch as appears attainable under the project. Nevertheless, alternative private development, adequately stimulated and supported by agricultural credit and technical advice, should be capable of achieving comparable results in the fresh ground- water areas of the project where the water table is ten or more feet from the surface (see para 2.82 to 2.81l). (i) Project Evaluation 2.86 On the basis of the modifications made to the IACA evaluation procedures discussed in Chapter II A above, the Bank Group has assessed the likely results of the project as follows: Results of Project Evaluation Incremental NPV (Rs. mill, present worth at 8%) 329 Benefit/Cost Ratio (at 8%) 1.74 Rate of Return: (a) exclusive of potential private savings 16% (b) inclusive of potential private savings 16.4% This compares to IACA's assessment -/ of incremental NPV before alloca- tion of benefits to surface water of Rs. 721 million and a rate of return on incremental costs over private expenditure only of 35 percent. The calculations pertaining to the Bank Group's evaluation are given in Appendix 5. 2.87 The private alternative has also been evaluated by the Bank Group in accordance with the procedures discussed in Chapter II A above. On this basis and excluding the provision of additional surface water, continued private development would give a rate of return of 76 percent because of considerably lower investment requirements. However, the present worth of incremental NPV attainable under the private alterna- tive would be only about one-half that of the public project. Details of the evaluation of the private alternative are given in A,pendix 6, pages 1 to 3. 1/ For details of IACA's evaluation see IACA Comprehensive Report, Volume 20, Annexure 15J, Chapter 4 (public project) and Appendix 1 (Private Alternative). ANNEX 4.1 Page 63 (j) Conclusions 2.88 The Rohri North project as formulated would give a satisfactory rate of return, and would also make a relatively larger contribution to agricultural production than private development. Therefore, the Bank Group has included this project, as formulated, in its Action Program for early implementation. Project preparation would appear sufficiently advanced to begin construction in the early part of Fiscal Year 1968/69. However, careful consideration should be given to the possibilities for initial private development in the more favorable parts of the project area. If private development were found to be feasible in parts of the area the public project could be limited in scope to those areas where water table control and mixing requirements would impair efficient groundwater development by private wells. ANNEX 4.1 APPENDIX 1 INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Page 1 Public Tubewell Project - Rohri North Revised Cost Estimate and Financial Requirements Local Currency Foreign Exchange Total (Rs. (Rs. (US $ 1/ 7CW. 7TisW_ mill) mill) Equiv.mil) mill) Equiv. mill) PROJECT PREPARATION- 4.5 4.0 0.84 8.5 1.79 TUBEWELL PROJECT Tubewells 29.4 42.3 8.90 71.7 15.09 Appurtenant Structures 3/ 13.3 2.0 0.42 15.3 3.21 Water Course Impr vements- 6.o - - 6.o 1.26 Duties and Taxes4cf 6.6 - - 6.6 1.39 Engineering and Administration.5/_ 5.5 4.4 0.93 10.0 2.10 Sub-Total 60.8 48.7 10.25 109.6 23.05 Contingencie s6/ 12.2 9.7 2.05 21.9 4.61 TOTAL TUBEWELL PROJECT: 73.0 58.4 12.30 131.5 27.66 ELECTRIFICATION Transmission 3.0 4.7 0.99 7.7 1.62 Distribution 15.1 23.5 4.94 38.6 8.11 Duties and Taxes4/ 8.5 - - 8.5 1.79 Engineering and Administration- 2.7 2.8 0.59 5.5 1.16 Sub-Total 29.3 31.0 6.52 60.3 12.68 Contingencies6/ 5.8 6.1 1.28 11.9 2.50 TOTAL ELECTRIFICATION 35.1 37.1 7.80 72.2 15.18 INTEREST DURING CONSTRUCTION Tubewell Projeck+7 15.7 _ _ 15.7 3.30 Electrification=' 4.3 - - 4.3 0.90 Sub-Total 20.0 - - 20.0 4.20 TOTAL FINANCIAL REQUIREKNTS 132.6 99.5 20.94 232.2 48.83 1/ Rate of exchange: US $1.00 = Rs.4.75. 2/ Estimated at 5 per cent of direct costs before contingencies. 3/ Estimated at Rs. 10 per acre of CCA. v Estimated at 15 per cent of foreign exchange component of direct costs before engineering and administration. 5/ Estimated at 10 per cent of direct costs after duties and taxes. 3/ Estimated at 20 per cent of direct costs after duties and taxes and engineering and administration. 7/ Estimated at 6 per cent per annum for two-year period for each phase of tubewell construction. 8/ Estimated at 6 per cent per annum for one-year period. APPENDIX 1 INDUS SPECIAL STUDY mage Z Public Tubewell Project - Rohri North Estimated Expenditure Schedule 1967/68 1968/69 1969/70 1970/71 1971/72 1972/73 Total ,/------------------------- (Rs. mirll)-------------------_---_-_--___- Project PreparationrF 8.5 _ - - - - 8.5 Tubewells, Structures and Water Courses 8.6 21.8 21.8 21.8 18.9 - 93.0 Duties and Taxes o.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.3 - 6.6 Engineering 0.9 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.0 - 10.0 Contingencies 2.0 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.4 - 21.9 Sub-Total 12.1 30.9 30.9 30.9 26.6 - 131.5 Interest during Con- struction 0.7 2.6 3.7 3.7 3.4 1.6 15.7 Total Tubewell Project]2.8 33.5 34.6 34.6 30.0 1.6 147.1 Electrification - 4.2 10.9 10.9 10.9 9.4 46.3 Duties and Taxes - 0.8 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.7 8.5 Engineering - 0.5 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.1 5.5 Contingencies - 1.1 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.4 11.9 Sub-Total - 6.6 17.0 17.0 17.0 14.6 72.2 Interest during Con- struction - 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 4.3 Total Electrification - 7.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 15.5 76.5 MOTAL FINANCIAL REQUIREKENTS 21.3 40.5 52.6 52.6 48.0 17.1 232.1 C== e =__ 1/ Incurred prior to start of construction. INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Rohri North Comparative Summary Water Budget "With the Project and "Without" Additional Tubewells Net Increase 1965 1975 1985 "With" the Project "With" "Without" "With" "Without" the Additional the Additional Surface Ground Existing Project Tubewells Project Tubewells Water Water Total -_______-------- (MAF) -------------------- Surface Supplies: Total: 1.45 1.27 1.45 1.71 1.45 0.26 - 0.26 …---------------------------------------------------------------------__-----__------------------------------------ Thereof during October to May 1/ 0.91 0.66 0.91 1.08 0.91 0.17 - 0.17 …___________________. Ground-Water Supplies: 0.02 1.07 0.04 2/ 1.21 3/ 0.04 - 1.19 1.19 Total Supplies: 1.47 2.34 1.49 2.92 1.49 0.26 1.19 1.45 1/ Release period during which reservoirs would be operated for irrigation requirements. 2/ Based on IACA's figures of 180 private tubewells in operation by 1967, and an average rate of utilization of about 27 per cent per annum. 3/ This would include substitution for existing private groundwater exploitation, i.e., the 0.04 MW IACA assumes would be available from private wells by 1967. SuIt 'I PUBLIC TUBEWELL PROJECT: ROHRI NORTH WATER BALANCE AT ULTIMATE DEVELOPMENT (ALL FIGURES IN MAF) CANAL i1-WATER COURSE-+E-<: FIELD TRANSPIRATION EVAPORATION I EVAPORATION I EVAPORATION 1 92 I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~RAIN 0 07 2.05 1.71 2.94 2.64 1 85 RIVER RECHARGE \ RE- IN CHARGE IRIGTINRECHARGE deRECHARGE PUMPING I 23 GROUND WATER RESERVOIR Zm mn DRAINAGE PUMPING 0 (R) I BRD - 3328m ANNEX 4.1 APPENIXM 3 Page I INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Rohri North Yield Pro4ections "%With" the Project (Maunds per Acre) Present IACA Projection Bank Group Projection 1965 1967 1975 1955 2000 1967 1975 1955 2000 Kharif: Coarse rice 4.0 4.2 - - - 4.2 - - - Cotton 8.0 8.2 11.5 17.5 25.0 8.3 10.9 15.6 25.0 Maize 6.0 6.1 10.0 22.0 36.0 6.2 8.2 13.1 31.5 Fodder 200.0 204.0 270.0 400.0 550.0 208.0 273.8 381.9 550.0 Pulses 6.0 6.1 7.5 10.0 14.0 6.2 8.2 11.1 14.0 Groundnuts - - - 27.0 36.0 - - 27.0 36.0 Rabi: Wheat 15.0 15.5 20.5 29.0 36.0 15.6 20.5 29.6 36.0 Fodder 330.0 340.0 450.0 650.0 900.0 343.2 451.7 629.1 900.0 Oilseeds 9.0 9.3 11.0 19.5 20.0 9.4 12.3 16.4 20.0 Gram 9.0 9.3 10.5 14.0 18.0 9.4 12.3 16.0 18.0 Maize - - - 22.0 36.0 - - 13.1 31.5 Pulses 6.0 6.2 - - - 6.2 - - - Perennials: Sugarcane (gur) 20.0 20.4 32.0 62.0 98.0 20.8 27.3 43.1 98.0 Fruit 65.0 66.3 85.0 115.0 160.0 663 85.0 115.0 160.0 Vegetables 110.0 112.2 145.0 180.0 230.0 112.2 145.0 180.0 230.0 APPENDqX 3 Page 2 INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Rohri North Yield Projections IrWithoutil Additional Tubewells (Mounds per Acre) Present IACA Projections Bank Grou Pro ections 19_5 1967 1975 1965 2000 1967 i975 - 2000 Kharif: Coarse rice 4.0 4.2 4.7 7.0 10.0 4.2 5.5 8.1 14.6 Cotton 8.0 8.2 8.6 11.0 14.0 8.3 10.9 15.6 25.0 Maize 6.0 6.1 6.5 8.5 10.5 6.2 7.3 8.9 12.0 Fodder 200.0 204.0 220.0 280.0 350.0 208.0 243.8 297.2 400.0 Pulses 6.0 6.1 6.5 8.5 10.5 6.2 7.3 8.9 12.0 Rabi: Wheat 15.0 15.5 16.6 22.5 30.0 15.6 20.5 29.6 36.0 Fodder 330.0 340.0 360.0 495.0 660.0 343.2 402.3 490.4 660.0 Oilseeds 9.0 9.3 10.0 13.5 18.0 9.4 11.0 13.4 18.0 Gram 9.0 9.3 9.5 13.5 18.0 9.4 11.0 13.4 18.0 Pulses 6.0 6.2 6.5 9.0 12.0 6.2 7.3 8.9 12.0 Perennials: Sugarcane (gur) 20.0 20.4 21.0 28.0 35.0 20.8 27.3 43.1 98.0 Fruit 65.0 66.3 68.0 91.0 114.0 66.3 85.0 115.0 160.0 Vegetables 110.0 112.2 115.0 154.0 192.5 112.2 145.0 180.0 230.0 I1DUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Rohri North Revised Projection of Production "With" the Project 1975 1985 1988 Cropped Yields Production GPV Cropped Yields Production GPV Gropped Yields Production GPV Acres (Mds/acre) ('000 mds) (Rs. mill) Acres (liMs/acre) ('000 mds) (Rs. mill) Acres (Mds/acre) ('000 mds) (Rs. mill) Kharifs Cotton 119,600 10.9 1,303.6 39.108 227,200 15.6 3,514.3 106.329 227,200 17.2 3,907.8 117.231, Maize 35,900 8.2 294.4 5.446 35,900 13.1 470.3 8.701 35,900 15.6 560.0 10.360 Fodder 80,100 273.8 21,931.4 - 83,700 381.9 31,965.0 - 83,700 410.9 34,392.3 - Pulses 6,000 8.2 h9.2 1.033 12,000 11.1 133.2 2.797 12,000 11.6 139.2 2.-923 .lroundnuts_ - 6,ooo 27.0 162.0 4.00 6 28.6 171.6 4.290 Sub-total: 241,600 45.587 364,800 121.877 364,800 134.8G7 Rlabi: Wheat 208,700 20.5 4,278.4 55.619 197,300 29.6 5,840.1 75.921 197,300 30.8 6,o76.8 78.998 Fodder 53,800 451.7 24,301.5 - 53,800 629.1 33,845.6 _ 53,800 675.9 36,363.4 Oilseeds 103,500 12.3 1,273.1 29.918 71,800 16.4 1,177.5 27.671 71,800 17.0 1,220.6 28.684 rama 13,100 12.3 161.1 2.296 6,000 16.0 96.0 1.368 6,00o 16.4 98.4 1.402 Maize - 8.2 - 12,000 13.1 157.2 2.908 12,000 15.6 187.2 3.463 ,reen Manure - Sub-total: 379,100 87.833 340,900 107.868 340,900 112.547 Perennial: Sugarcane 32,300 27.3 881.8 15.872 29,900 43.1 1,288.7 23.197 29,900 50.8 1,518.9 27.340 Fruit 12,600 85.0 1,071.0 11.781 20,900 115.0 2,403.5 26.438 20,900 122.8 2,566.5 28.232 Jegetables 3,600 145.0 522.0 5.742 9.000 130.0 1,620.0 17.820 90 189.1 1,701.9 18.721 Sub-total: 48,500 33.395 59,300 67.455 59,800 74.293 3PV of Crops 166.815 297.200 321.647 V Animal Husbandry 57.627 110.481, 119.806 Total GPV 224.442 407.684 441.453 On-Farm Costs 71.821 146.766 158.923 Total NPV 152.621 260.918 282.530 1/ 3ased on IACA projection except for 1975. 1> 2/ 1975 - 32 of Total SPV D 1985 * 364 of Total GPV 0fm 19883 - 36b of Total SPV. si P F' H INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Rohri North Revised Projection of Production "Without" the Project 1969 1975 1985 1988 Cropped Acres Yields Production GPV Yields Production GOV Yields Production GPV Yields PfodEti m GPV (mds/acre) (000 mds) (Rs7.iU) (mds7acre) (T000 Uds) (Rs7.miIl) (m,ds/acre) ('000 mds) (Rs-.mill) (md7sacre) a) (Rs. mill) Kharif: Coarse Rice 3,000 tt.3 12.9 .135 5.5 16.5 .143 8.1 24.3 .210 9.1 27.3 .236 Cotton 68,800 8.6 591.7 17.751 10.9 71,9.9 22.497 15.6 1,073.3 32.199 17.2 1,183.1, 35.502 Maize 44,900 6.5 291.9 5.400 7.3 327.8 6.064 8.9 399.6 7.393 9.5 426.6 7.892 Fodder 62,800 216.4 13,589.9 - 243.8 15,310.6 - 297.2 18,664.2 - 315.4 19,807.1 - Pulses 6,000 6.5 39.0 .819 7.3 43.8 .920 8.9 53.4 1.121 9.5 57.0 1.197 Sub-total: 185,500 24.105 29.624 40.923 h4.827 Rabi: Wheat 131,600 16.2 2,131.9 27.715 20.5 2,697.8 35.071 29.6 3,895.4 50.640 30.8 4,053.3 52.693 Fodder 35,900 357.1 12,819.9 - 402.3 ,W,442.6 - 490.4 17,605.4 - 520.6 18,689.5 - Oilseeds 107,600 9.7 1,043.7 24,527 11.0 1,183.6 27.815 13.4 1,441.8 33.882 14.2 1,527.9 35.906 Gram 17,900 9.7 173.6 2.4714 11.0 196.9 2.806 13.4 239.9 3.418 lb.2 254.2 3.622 Pulses 6,ooo 6.5 39.0 .819 7.3 43.8 .920 8.9 53.4 1.121 9.5 57.0 1.197 Sub-total: 299,000 55.535 66.612 89.061 93.418 Perennials: Sugarcane (gur) 32,900 21.6 710.6 12.791 27.3 898.2 16.168 43.1 1,418.0 25.524 50.8 1,671.3 30.083 Fruit 10,200 70.3 717.1 7.888 85.0 867.0 9.537 115.0 1,173.0 12.903 122.8 1,252.6 13.779 Vegetables 1,800 119.0 214.2 2.356 145.0 261.0 2.871 180.0 324.0 3.56k 189.1 340.4 3.744 Sub-total: 44,900 23.035 28.576 41.991 47.606 GPV of Crops 102.675 124.812 171.975 185.851 GFV of Animal Husbandry 38.10D 4,7.400 69.000 76.700 Total 3P7 140.775 172.212 240.975 262.551 On-Farm Costs 2/ 45.048 55.108 86.751 94 .518 Total NPV 95.727 117.104 154.224 168.033 1/ Based on IACA ProJ-ction. 2/ 1969 - 32Z of Total 3PV. (D 1975 * 32% of Total GPV, | . 1985 = 36% of Total GPV. 1988 - 36% of Total GPV. INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project -- Rohri North Calculation of Rate of Return Costj"oe Incremental NPV OiN and Incremental Benefits R A T E 0 F R E T U R N NPV 'With" NPV 'BWithout" Incremental Additional After Allocation to Infrastructure Power Attributable Potential Including Potential Capital Costs Net Benefits Project Costa Year Project Project NPV Surface Water Surface Water and Services 2/ Coots Increment Private Savings Private Savings of Project at 16% 3/ at 16.4% 4/ at 16% S at 16.4% 4/ ---------------------------- (Rs. million) ---------------------------- 1967 - - - - - - - - - - 20.0 - - 20.3 17.2 1968 94.1 94.1 - - - - - 29.3 - - 25.2 21.7 1969 96.8 95.7 1.1 - 1.1 0.04 1.1 (-) .04 0.9 0.9 29.3 - o.6 22.0 18.6 1970 103.0 98.9 4.1 - 4.1 0.1 4.0 - 0.9 0.9 29.3 - 0.5 19.2 i6.o 1971 111.5 102.2 9.3 - 9.3 0.3 6.9 2.1 0.9 3.0 25.3 1.1 1.4 14.5 11.8 1972 121.4 105.7 15.7 - 15.7 o.6 9.8 5.3 0.9 6.2 2.4 2.5 1973 132.4 109.3 23.1 - 23.1 o.8 12.1 10.2 o.9 11.1 4.0 3.8 1974 142.5 113.0 29.5 - 29.5 1.0 12.1 16.4 0.9 17.3 5.6 5.1 1975 152.6 117.1 35.5 - 35.5 1.2 11.3 23.0 0.9 23.9 6.8 6.1 1976 161.2 120.4 4o.8 - 40.8 1.4 11.5 27.9 0.9 28.8 7.2 6.3 1977 170.1 123.8 46.3 - 46.3 1.6 1n.6 33.1 0.9 34.0 7.5 6.4 1978 179.7 127.3 52.4 - 52.4 1.8 11.6 39.0 0.9 39.9 7.7 6.5 1979 189.6 130.8 58.8 - 58.8 2.0 11.7 45.1 0.9 46.o 7.8 6.4 1980 200.1 134.5 65.6 2.3 63.3 2.2 11.8 49.3 0.9 50.2 7.4 6.o 1981 211.D 138.3 72.7 3.6 69.1 2.4 11.8 54.9 0.9 55.8 7.2 5.7 1982 222.4 142.2 80.2 7.6 72.6 2.5 11.9 58.2 0.9 59.1 6.7 5.0 1983 234.4 146.2 88.2 10.7 77.5 2.7 12.0 62.8 0.9 63.7 6.3 4.8 1984 246.9 150.3 96.6 15.4 81.2 2.8 12.1 66.3 0.9 67.2 5.8 4.4 1985 260.9 154.2 106.7 19.3 87.4 3.0 12.1 72.3 0.9 73.2 5.5 4.1 1986 267.9 158.6 109.3 19.8 89.5 3.1 12.2 74.2 0.9 75.1 4.9 3.6 1987 275.1 163.2 111.9 20.3 91.6 3.2 12.2 76.2 0.9 77.1 4.4 3.2 1988 282.5 168.0 114.5 20.8 93.7 3.3 12.2 78.2 0.9 79.1 4.0 2.8 102.3 85.2 101.2 85.3 N3ate Of Re turn 3/ 16% Rate of Return 4/ = 16.4% 1/ Charged at average value per acre foot of total incremental water availability. Incremental Value/Acre Foot Incremental Water of Incremental NPV Availability Availability (Rs. Hill) (MAF) (Rs.) 1980 65.6 1.143 57.4 a b 1981 72.7 1.201 60.5 5 1982 80.2 1.259 63.7 1983 88.2 1.317 67.0 1984 96.6 1.376 70.2 1985 106.7 1.435 74.4 1988 114.5 1.435 79.8 2/ Allowance for public expenditures on infrastructure and intensified technical and advisory services. The allowances include . 1.85% of attributable increment for roads. 1.65% of attributable increment for supporting services. Charged on incremental NPV after allocation to surface water only. 3/ Excluding Potential Private Savings. 4/ Including Potential Private Savings. INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubeweli Project - Rohri North Benefit: Cost Ratio Incremental NPV Project Costs Including Discounted at 8% After Allocation 0 & M,Services and Benefits Costs Year to Surface Water Infrastructure Before deduction of 1/ After deduction of 2/ Potential Private Savings - Potential Private Savings - 1/ 2/ ------------------------------------------------ (Rs. million) --------------------------------------------------- 1967 _ 20.0 19.1 18.5 17.7 1968 - 29.3 28.4 _ 25.1 24.3 1969 1.1 30.4 29.5 0.9 24.1 23.4 1970 4.1 33.4 32-5 3-0 24.5 23.9 1971 9.3 32.5 31.6 6.3 22.1 21.5 1972 15.7 10.4 9.5 9.9 6.6 6.o 1973 23.1 12.9 12.0 13.5 7.5 7.0 1974 29.5 13.1 12.2 15.9 7.1 6.6 1975 35.5 12.5 11.6 17.8 6.3 5.8 1976 40.8 12.9 12.0 18.9 6.0 5.6 1977 46.3 13.2 12.3 19.9 5.7 5.3 1978 52.4 13.4 12.5 20.8 5.3 5.0 1979 58.8 13.7 12.8 21.6 5.0 4.7 1980 63.3 14.0 13.1 21.5 4.8 4.5 1981 69.1 14.2 13.2 21.8 4.5 4.2 1982 72.6 14.4 13.5 21.2 4.2 3.9 1983 77.5 14.7 13.8 20.9 4.0 3.8 1984 81.2 14.9 14.0 20.3 3.7 3.5 1985 87.4 15.1 14.2 20.3 3.5 3.3 1986 89.5 15.3 14.4 19.2 3.3 3.1 1987 91.6 15.4 14-5 18.2 3.1 2.9 1988 93.7 15.5 14.5 17.2 2.9 2.7 B/C ratio 1/at 8% = 1.66 329.1 197.8 188.7 B/C ratio 2/at 8% = 1.74 - 1/ Before deductions of potential private savings. -CD 2/ After deductions of potential private savings were added to the benefit stream, rather than netted H out of the cost stream, the B/C ratio would not change. x 3/ If potential private savings are added to the benefit streams rather than netted out from the cost \n stream, then the B/C ratio would be 1.71 as shown below: Present worth of Benefits: 329.1 Savings: 9.1 B/C ratio 338.2 = 1.71 338.2 197.8 INIWJS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Rohri North Private Alternative - Rate of Installation and Incremental Water Availability Number of Increase in Private Replacements of Incremental Incremental Wells in Wells During Additional Number of Wells Water Availability Year Operation 1/ Project Period Wells in Operation (MAF) 1965 100 1966 180 1967 385 125 125 0.03 1968 480 175 300 0.07 1969 700 220 520 0.12 1970 950 250 770 0.17 1971 1,200 250 1,020 0.23 1972 1,450 250 1,270 0.29 1973 1,700- 250 1,520 0.34 1974 1,950 250 1,770 0.h0 1975 2,200 250 2,020 0.45 1976 2,200 2,020 O.45 1977 2,200 125 2,020 0.45 1978 2,200 175 2,020 0.45 1979 2,200 220 2,020 0.45 1980 2,200 250 2,020 o.45 1981 2,200 250 2,020 0.45 1982 2,200 250 2,020 0.45 1983 2,200 250 2,020 0.45 19814 2,200 250 2,020 O.45 1985 2,200 250 2,020 0.45 1986 2,200 2,020 0.45 1987 2,200 125 2,020 0.45 1988 2,200 175 2,020 0.45 1/ This rate of installation accepts the ceiling for coverage with private tubewells stated in the IACA prcject report. 2/ Assumed rate of average utilization: 30% x Each well would pump for about 2,630 hours and produce about 225 acre feet per annum. 0\ INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Rahri North E-stimate of Incremental NPV of Private Tubewall Alter-native Acreage Cropped Acreage Cropped Acreage Cropped Receiving Ad' 1 Expansion of Under 'With" Under 'Without" NPV of Private N?V Increment Year WaterY Acre ae Copd Condition Condition Overall Intensity Alternative "Without" NPV - (1000) 5Aped o'o6F T -T Cr65T '000 acres per cent (Rs.-ill. (Hag. mill.) (Rs. mill.) 1967 12.5 6.4 18.9 56i.8 580.7 97.1 93.8 92.8 1.0 1968 30.0 15.0 45.0 54.4.3 589.3 98.5 96.6 94.1 2.5 1969 52.0 25.8 77.8 522.3 600.1 100.4 100.0 95.7 4.3 1970 77.0 35.6 112.6 497.3 609.9 102.0 105.2 98.9 6.3 1971 102.0 48.8 150.8 472.3 623.1 104.2 111.4 102.2 9.2 1972 127.0 61.7 188.7 447.3 636.0 106.4 117.9 105.7 12.2 1973 152.0 71.8 223.8 422.3 646.1 108.0 124.3 109.3 15.0 1974 177.0 84.7 261.7 397.3 659.0 110.2 131.5 113.0 18.5 1975 202.0 94.8 296.8 372.3 669.1 111.9 139.0 117.1 21.9 1976 202.0 90.0 292.0 372.3 664.3 111.1 3142.2 120.4 21.8 1977 202.0 90.0 292.0 372.3 664.3 111.1 1146.7 123.8 22.9 1978 202.0 90.0 292.0 372.3 664.3 111.1 151.3 127.3 24.o 1979 202.0 90.0 292.0 372.3 664.3 111.1 156.0 130.8 25.2 1980 202.0 90.0 292.0 372.3 664.3 111.1 160.9 134.5 26.h 1981 202.0 84.9 286.9 372.3 659.2 110.2 164.6 138.3 26.3 1982 202.0 84.9 286.9 372.3 659.2 110.2 169.8 1142.2 27.6 1983 202.0 84.9 286.9 372.3 659.2 110.2 175.1 1146.2 28.9 1984 202.0 84.9 286.9 372.3 659.2 110.2 180.5 150.3 30.2 1985 202.0 84.9 286.9 372.3 659.2 110.2 186.3 154.2 32.1 1986 202.0 84.9 286.9 372.3 659.2 110.2 191.4 158.6 32.8 1987 202.0 84.9 286.9 372.3 659.2 110.2 196.8 163.2 33.6 1988 202.0 84.9 286.9 372.3 659.2 110.2 202.3 168.0 34.3 I/ Based on existing water depth of 2.56 acre feet on historical intensity. Assumes each incremental well wiill increase irrigation to full delta on 100 acre. 3.26 - 1975 3.37 - 1985 INIXS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Rohri North Rate of Return of Private Tubewell Alternative Rate of Return Incremental Infrastructure 0 & M Capital Total Benefits Costs Year NPV and Services Y Costs / costs 3/ Costs at 8% at 8% -------------------------- Rs. mill. --------------------------- 1967 1.0 0.1 0.5 1.3 1.9 0.9 1.8 1968 2.5 0.1 1.2 1.8 3.1 2.1 2.7 1969 4.3 0.2 2.0 2.2 4.4 3.4 3.5 1970 6.3 0.2 3.0 2.5 5.7 4.6 4.2 1971 9.2 0.3 4.0 2.5 6.8 6.3 4.6 1972 12.2 0.4 5.0 2.5 7.9 7.7 5.0 1973 15.0 0.5 5.9 2.5 8.9 8.7 5.2 1974 18.5 0.6 6.9 2.5 10.0 10.0 5.4 1975 21.9 0.8 7.9 2.5 11.2 U.0 5.6 1976 21.8 0.8 7.9 - 8.7 10.1 4.0 1977 22.9 0.8 7.9 1.3 10.0 9.8 4.3 1978 24.0 0.8 7.9 1.8 10.5 9.5 4.2 1979 25.2 0.9 7.9 2.2 11.0 9.3 4.0 1980 26.4 0.9 7.9 2.5 11.3 9.0 3.8 1981 26.3 0.9 7.9 2.5 U.3 8.3 3.6 1982 27.6 1.0 7.9 2.5 11.4 8.1 3.3 1983 28.9 1.0 7.9 2.5 u.4 7.8 3.1 1984 30.2 1.1 7.9 2.5 U.5 7.6 2.9 1985 32.1 1.1 7.9 2.5 11.5 7.4 2.7 1986 32.8 1.1 7.9 - 9.0 7.1 1.9 1987 33.6 1.2 7.9 1.3 10.4 6.7 2.1 1988 34.3 1.2 7.9 1.8 10.9 6.3 2.0 161.7 79.9 B/C ratio at 8% = 2.0 1/ Based on a charge of 3.5% on Incremental NPV -s umder public tubewell program. 7/ Based on an average O&M cost of Rs. 3,900 per tubewell 3/ Based on an average cost of Rs. 10,000 per tubewell, and the assumed rate of installation ANNNEX 4.1 Page 65 3. The Panjnad-Abbasia Project - (a) The Project 2.89 The project is located in the Sutlej and Panjnad Left Bank region adjacent to the confluence of the Indus and Panjnad Rivers, (see Map ). The project consists of providing additional irrigation supplies and water table control for 878,000 acres of commanded cultur- able area (CCA). In the past this area has frequently suffered from severe water shortage because of unreliable river flows and a compara- tively low priority for surface water allocations. The project area is served by the Panjnad and Abbasia canals and commanded by the Panjnad Barrage. This Barrage, being below the network of link canals to be completed in the Punjab as part of the replacement works of the Indus Waters Treaty (1960), will be affected by diversions to and from these links. Following completion of the link canals the project area could absorb additional surface supplies originating in the Indus. Although the project area will, under the Treaty, be directly affected by the withdrawal of the Sutlej and Ravi waters, the surface water availability is not expected to alter appreciably - due to the link canal system - before the introduction of Tarbela. 2.90 The CCA included under the project is presently mainly non- perennial as shown in the following table: CCA Included Under the Project Canal Command Total CCA CCA of the Pro,ject -----(million acres)----------- Panjnad and Abbasia Perennial part of commands O.51 0.06 Non-perennial part of commands 0.94 0.82 TOTAL 1.45 0.88 The distribution of the groundwater quality in the project area is about as follows: 1/ IACA Comprehensive Report, Volume 14, Annexure 15D. Page 66 Groundwater Quality Zones of the Project Groundwater Quality Project Area Zone Percent '000 Acres Less than 1,000 ppm TDS 82 716 1,000 to 3,000 ppm TDS 18 162 TOTAL 100 878 Approximately 729,000 acres (or 83 percent of the project area) has a water table less than ten feet from the surface and one-third of this is effectively waterlogged (water table at depth of less than five feet). Localized areas of severe salinity are also encountered in the project area. However, their extent would need to be further determined in the course of project preparation. 2.91 Land tenure data are only available for the Rahimyar Khan District which covers part of the project area. The distribution of farm sizes and tenureship in this district is about as follows: Farm Size and Land Tenure Situation Percent Percent of Farm Size of Farms Farm Area Less than 5 acres 53 12 5 to 25 acres 1 58 Over 25 acres 6 30 Owner operated 53 55 Owner cum tenant 10 - Tenant operated 37 45 The average farm size in the district, which is somewhat representative of the project area, is about 13 acres and thus larger than the average for the Punjab. 2.92 The water availability in the project area is presently about 2.08 MAF. With the project this would increase to h.57 MAF at full development. Of the increase of 2.h9 MAF about 0.39 MAF would be addi- tional surface water supplies introduced after provision of tubewell drainage and the availability of Tarbela supplies. About 2.10 MAF would be provided by public tubewells above existing private groundwater ANNEX 4.1 r - ~~~~Page 67 exploitation. This increase in irrigation supplies would enable the largely non-perennial patterns of agriculture to change to perennial cropping. It would be sufficient to support a growth in cropped acreage from presently 83h,100 acres (95 percent intensity 4/ ) to 1,300,000 acres in 1985 (1h8 percent intensity). (b) Physical Works 2.93 The physical works of the project would consist of the installa- tion of some 1,623 public tubewells and appurtenant works. Of these, 1,315 wells of four cusec capacity would be in the fresh groundwater zone of the project area (82 percent or 716,000 acres CCA) and 308 wells of 2.8 cusec capacity in the zone underlain by groundwater (162,000 acres CCA) requir- ing mixing with surface water. Drainage works to control migration of saline groundwater from the adjacent desert into the mixing zones of the project are not considered necessary at this stage of development but would be included in development of saline groundwater zones following the implementation of the Action Program. (c) Construction Schedule 2.94 The installation of the public tubewells would extend over five years in accordance with the following schedule: Preliminary Construction Schedule 1968/69 1969/70 1970/71 1971/72 1972/73 --------------(No. of wellsT---- Drilling of Wells and Construction of Structures 143 540 540 400 - Electrification - 143 540 540 400 Wells in Operation - 143 683 1,223 1,623 2.95 Construction of the tubewell part of the project would be completed at the middle of the Fourth Plan period. No detailed studies and investigations for project preparation have been carried out thus far and IACA's report is a first attempt to identify and formulate this project with regard to its technical, agricultural, financial and economic implications. Recently WAPDA initiated detailed project pre- paration for the area, and its consultants (Tipton & Kalmbach, Inc.) have begun field work. Project preparation is likely to be completed to meet the above schedule. 1/ Perennials counted twice. ANNEj, 4.1 Page 68 (d) Cost Estimates and Expenditure Schedule 2.96 The total cost of the project is tentatively estimated by the Bank Group at about Rs. 286.6 million (60.4 million US$ equivalent). This would include the following: Summary Cost Estimates Local Foreign Currency Exchange Total --------(Rs. millionT-------------- Project preparation 5.5 5.0 10.5 Tubewells 36.0 52.0 88.0 Electrification 23.5 35.2 58.7 Other Civil Works 22.0 3.0 25.0 Subtotal 87.0 95.2 182.2 Overhead 28.8 9.0 37.8 Contingencies 22.1 19.8 41.9 Subtotal 50.9 28.8 79.7 Interest during Construction 24.7 - 24.7 TOTAL 162.6 124.0 286.6 Details of the cost estimates are given in Appendix 1. The foreign exchange component of the project would be about 43 percent of total project costs or US$ 26.1 million equivalent. 2.97 Expenditures would be spread over approximately five years in accordance with the following schedule: Year 1 2 3 4 5 --------------(Rs. mill7--------- - Tubewells and associated works 25.4 57.3 59.7 45.1 2.4 Electrification - 8.5 32.2 32.2 23.9 TOTAL 25.4 65.8 91.9 77.3 26.3 A more detailed expenditure schedule is given in Appendix 1, page 2. ANNEX 4.1 Page 69 (e) Recovery of Project Expenditures 2.98 On the basis of the above cost estimates a preliminary assess- ment has been made of the charges required to recover total project costs over the lifetime of the project. The average annual rate of recovery, including operation and maintenance expenditures, would have to be about Rs. 39.0 million as shown below: Annual Costs for Operation, Maintenance and Recovery of Capital Annual Costs (Rs. mill) Capital costs 1V (Annuity at 6% over 20 years for Rs. 189.8 million) 16.6 Annual operation and maintenance costs 2/ (including repairs, electricity and staff costs) 22.4 TOTAL 39.0 1/ Based on recovery of project investment including project preparation and interest during construction but without costs of electrification. 2/ Average annual costs based on weighted average over lifetime of the project. 2.99 This would be equivalent to about Rs. 44 per acre CCA or Rs. 30 per cropped acre at the stage of full development. Existing water rates average about Rs. 8 per cropped acre. Future water rates to recover total project costs including 081 plus charges for surface supplies at existing rates, would have to be in the neighborhood of Rs. 38 per cropped acre or about Rs. 56 per acre CCA. This would be about 11 percent of the expected net value of production in 1985. (f) The Irrigation Regime 2.100 The mean quantities of surface and groundwater which would be made available with the project and the comparison with the irrigation water availability likely to prevail if no further private tubewells are installed after commencement of construction are summarized in the water budget attached as Appendix 2. Groundwater exploitation by existing private tubewells would be expected to discontinue following implementation of the project. The total water availability at watercourse head under the public project would be about 4.57 MAF at the stage of full development. ANNEX 4.1 Page 70 Of this, 2.37 MAF would be provided by public tubewells and 2.20 MAF by canal supplies. Some 0.40 MAF of groundwater would substitute private exploitation, i.e. the net increase of groundwater availability due to the project would be about 1.97 MAF. Total surface water availa- bility at watercourse heads would increase from 1.81 NAF to 2.20 MAF or by 0.39 MAF. The lowering of the water table to an average depth of ten feet in the early stages of the project would require the permanent ex- traction of about 0.55 MAF of groundwater before additional surface supplies could be admitted into the project area. 2.101 For the project area as a whole, the water availability per cropped acre would be enhanced from 2.4 acre-feet in 1965 to 5.2 acre- feet per acre CCA in 1985. This would enable the increase of average cropping intensities from 95 percent in 1965 to 148 percent in 1985 at full delta. 2.102 As an alternative to the public tubewell project further irrigation development could take place through the continued installa- tion of private tubewells. The following table shows water availability and potential intensity growth as projected for these alternative forms of development. Water Availability and Cropping Intensity (1975 and 1985) Under Alternating Forms of Groundwater Development 1975 1985 Private Public Private Public Number of wells 3,472 2! 1,623 4,591 2/ 1,623 Surface Supplies (MAF) 1.81 2.08 1.81 2.20 Annual Pumpage (MAF) 0.78 1.66 1.03 2.37 Total Annual Watercourse delivery (MAF) 2.59 3.74 2.84 4.57 Cropping Intensity (%) 109 124 114 148 Acres Cropped ('000) 954 1,090 1,004 1,300 Acre-feet/acres cropped 2.7 3.4 2.8 3.5 1/ Private wells of one cusec capacity. ANNEX 4.1 Page 71 2.103 The table indicates that under the assumptions made private groundwater development would not be capable of pumping more than about 43 percent of the annual recharge and therefore provides insufficient control of the water table. As a result, additional surface water could not be admitted and the combined water availability under the projected growth of private tubewell installations would support an intensity of only 114 percent at full delta or about 296,000 cropped acres less than under public development. (g) Agricultural Development 2.104 The cropping intensity for the project area in 1965 was estima- ted to be around 95 percent. Though the project area compares favorably with the other areas on the left bank of the Sutlej River agricultural development is at present limited by non-perennial and unreliable canal supplies, and by the high water table prevailing in about one quarter of the project area. 2.105 The project area is situated in the cotton zone of W4est Pakistan. The main kharif crop in addition to cotton and fodder is coarse grain. The relatively large area under coarse grains reflects the extent to which drought resistant crops are planted to counter the effects of unreliable kharif supplies. The main rabi crops are wheat, fodder and oilseeds. Of the perennial crops sugarcane has a remarkably high intensity though the canal command is non-perennial. Existing yields for all crops are generally comparable with those in areas with perennial irrigation supplies. IACA's estimates indicate that the 1965 value of crop production was of the order of Rs. 150 million and livestock production Rs. 45 million, giving a total GPV of Rs. 195 million. On average, this would be about Rs. 222 per acre of CCA. Following the prevailing trends, total GPV would be expected to grow to about Rs. 211 million at the beginning of construction. 2.106 According to IACA the number of private tubewells in the project area would increase from about 615 in 1965 to about 1,280 in 1968. With the start of the project, private tubewell development would fall off and public tubewells would successively substitute existing private wells. The increased water availability under public tubewell development would support the following intensity growth: Growth of Cropped Acreage Under Public Development 1/ 1/ Year Intensity Percent - Cropped Acreage ('000) - 1965 95 834 1968 (start of 97 851 project) 1975 124 1,090 1985 148 1,300 1989 148 1,300 1/ Perennials counted twice. ANNEX 4.1 Page 72 As stated earlier, continued private groundwater development would support a cropping intensity of only about 114 percent at full delta. 2.107 The Bank Group has made assessments of the growth of agricultural production in the project area "with" public groundwater development as well as without" additional water development. In accordance with the cropping intensity, cropping patterns and yield growth projected for the respective cases (see Appendices 3 and 4 for details) the GPV and the produc- tion increments would be expected to develop about as follows: Growth of GPV "With" and "Without" Groundwater Development Incre- "Without" "With" mental Additional Groundwater the Project GPV Year Crops Livestock Total Crops Livestock Total Total ------------------------(Rs. mill)---------_-_-____________ 1965 150 45 195 150 45 195 - 1975 202 65 267 262 85 347 80 1985 288 83 371 463 189 652 281 Over the life of the project the GPV would more than triple and the 1/ level of production would be 176 percent of that of the "without" case. - The GPV per acre CCA would increase from Rs. 222 in 1965 to Rs. 743 in 1985 as compared to Rs. 423 per acre CCA in the "without" case. 2.108 To achieve the above projected growth of production great efforts would have to be made to make available the necessary quanti- ties of non-water inputs. Allowing for increased on-farm expenditure and associated current project costs as well as the allocation of benefits to additional surface water absorption the incremental net production value (NPV) for reference years would be expected to develop as follows over the lifetime of the project: 1/ Detailed projections of the GPV growth at constant prices for the "With" and "Without" cases are given in Appendix 4, pages l and 2. ANNEX 4.i Page 73 Incremental Net Benefits Attributab, to Public Groundwater Dpvelopment - 1975 1985 1989 -(Rs. mill)---------- NPV "1With" 236 417 475 NPV "Without" 182 238 261 Incremental NPV 54 179 214 Allowance to surface water 10 29 37 Allowance for infrastructure and services 2 5 6 Increase in O&M expenditure 12 17 17 Total associated costs 24 51 60 Incremental net benefits attributable to the project 30 128 154 1/ For details see Appendix 5, pages 1 and 2. In the Sutlej Left Bank region private tubewell development has been relatively slow in the past and a comparison with the alternative of private tubewell development (see Appendix 6, pages 2 and 3) indicates that, after due allowance for all costs, the incremental net benefits attainable from the public tubewell project would be about three times that from continued private well installations. (h) Farmer Incentives 2.109 The benefits obtainable under the project should provide con- siderable incentives for the farmers. Based on ten acres CCA, average farm incomes would be expected to improve as follows: Average Changes in Farm Income per 10 Acres of CCA Within the Project Area Under Alternative Forms of Development 1975 1985 1989 W7out Private Public Wout Private Public Wo-ut Private Public Cropping Intensity (percent) 97 109 124 97 114 148 97 114 1)48 X | GPV (Rs.) 3,048 3,428 3,950 4,231 5,312 7,422 4,654 5,942 8,453 - On-Farm Expenditure (Rs.) 975 1,104 1,264 1,523 1,902 2,672 1,675 2,152 3,043 H Water Charges M (Rs.) 1)49 295 531 149 365 562 1149 365 562 Total Current Expenditure (Rs.) 1,124 1,399 1,795 1,672 2,267 3,234 1,824 2,517 3,605 Farm Income (Rs.) 19 2,029 2,155 2,559 32 425 14,848 1/ Water charges for the "Without" case consist of: (i) Surface water charges at Rs. 8 per acre cropped Rs. 78 (ii) O&M tubewells existing in 1968 (1,201 wells) Rs. 53 (iii) Amortization at 6 percent over 10 years for existing wells Rs. 18 TOTAL Rs. 149 Water charges for full private tubewell development consist of: (i) Surface water charges at Rs. 8 per acre cropped Rs. 91 (ii) O&M for private tubewells Rs. 203 (iii) Amortization at 6 percent over 10 years for private wells Rs. 71 TOTAL Rs. 365 Water charges at full development for public tubewell development consist of: (i) Surface water charges at Rs. 8 per acre cropped Rs. 118 (ii) O&M and amortization at 6 percent over 20 years Rs. 444 TOTAL Rs. 562 ANNEX 4.1 Page 75 These results are averages only for the project area as a whole. Individual farmers with private tubewells at their disposal may achieve and exceed the average farm incomes projected under public development. However, private development has been less active in this area and because of limited coverage, less efficient distribution of groundwater and no increased surface water supplies, the private alternative is not likely to increase farm incomes through- out the project area as much as appears attainable under the project. In absolute terms farmers' income, with the public project, would grow on average from Rs. 2,100 per farm of ten acres CCA in 1975 to more than Rs. 4,800 in 1989. This should be sufficiently attractive to enlist farmers' active cooper- ation under the project. (i) Project Evaluation 2.110 On the basis of the modifications made to the IACA evaluation procedures discussed in Chapter II, A above, the Bnk Group has assessed the likely results of the project as follows: Results of Project Evaluation - Public Project Incremental NPV (Rs. mill.; present worth at 8%) 597 Benefit/Cost Ratio (at 8%) 2.4 Rate of Return: a) exclusive of potential private savings 19% b) inclusive of potential private savings 22% this compares to IACA's assessment 1/ of incremental NPV before allocation of benefits to surface water of Rs. 1,251 million and a rate of return on incremental costs of 47 percent. The calculations pertaining to the Bank Group's evaluation are given in Appendix 5, pages 1 and 2. 2.111 The private alternative as evaluated by the Bank Group, excluding the provision of additional surface water, would give a rate of return of 86 percent. However, the incremental NPV attainable under the private al- ternative would be less than one-half of that attainable under the public tubewell project. Details of the evaluation of the private alternative are given in Aprendix 6, page 3. (j) Conclusion 2.112 Though only indicative, the rate of return on total investments in the public project of 19 percent after allowance for benefits attributable 1/ For details of IACA's Evaluation see IACA Comprehensive Report, Volume 15, Annexure 15D, Chapter 4 (public project) and Appendix 1 (for private alternative). ANNNEY 4.1 Page 76 to increased surface supplies would appear satisfactory. The alternative of continued private tubewell development would appear capable of achieving a higher rate of return on investment than is likely to be attained under the public tubei%Bll project. However, public development would make a substantially greater contribution to agricultural production than is presently feasible in the Panjnad-Abbasia area under continued private tubewell development. The Bank Group has, therefore, included the Panjnad-Abbasia project in the Action Program as scheduled. Project'-preparation should be continued at an accelerated pace to ensure that the project is ready for implementation by the beginning of the Fiscal Year 1968/69. ANNEX 4.1 APPENDIX 1 Page 1 INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Panjnad Abbasia Revised Cost Estimate and Financial Requirements Local Currency Foreign Exchan Total (-Rs. (_Rs. (US$ ;Y (Rs. (US$ mill) mill) Equiv.) mill) Equiv.) PROJECT PREPARATION - 5.5 5.0 1.05 10.5 2.21 TUBEWELL PROJECT Tubewells 36.0 52.0 10.95 88.o 18.53 Appurtenant Structures 13.2 3.0 0.63 16.2 3.41 Watercourse Improvment 31 8.8 - - 8.8 1.85 Duties and Taxes 4/ 8.3 - 8.3 1.75 Engineering and Administration - 6.6 5.5 1.16 12.1 2.55 Subtotal 72.9 60.5 12.74 133.4 28.09 Contingencies 6/ l4.6 12.1 2.55 26.7 5.62 TOTAL TUBEWELL PROJECT 87.5 72.6 15.29 160.1 33.71 ELECTRIFICATION Transmission 4.1 6.1 1.28 10.2 2.15 Distribution 19.4 29.1 6.13 48.5 10.21 Duties and Taxes 4/ e 10.5 - - 10.5 2.21 Engineering and Administration - 3.h 3.5 0.74 6.9 1.h6 Subtotal 37.h 38.7 8.15 76.1 16.03 Contingencies 6/ 7.5 7.7 1.62 15.2 3.20 TOTAL ELECTRIFICATION 44.9 46.h 9.77 91.3 19.23 INTEREST DURING CONSTRUCTION Tubewell Project 7/ 19.2 - - 19.2 4.O0 Electrification 87 5.5 5.5 1.16 Subtotal 2h.7 - - 2h.7 5.20 TOTAL FINANCIAL REQUTREMENTS 162.6 12h.0 26.11 286.6 60.35 17 Rate of exchange used: 1:4.75. 2/ Estimated at five percent direct costs before contingencies. 3/ Estimated at Rs. 10/acre CCA. 4~/ Estimated at 15 percent of direct Foreign Exchange Costs before Engineering and Administration. 5/ Estimated at ten percent of direct costs after Duties and Taxes. 6/ Estimated at 20 percent of direct costs after Duties and Taxes and Engineering and Administration. 7/ Estimated at six percent per annum for two-year period for each individual phase of tubewell construction. 8/ Estimated at six percent per annum for one-year period. APPENDIX 1 Page Z INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Panjnad Abbasia Estimated Expenditure Schedule Based on Bank Group Cost Estiunates 1968/69 1969/70 1970/71 1971/72 1972/73 Total ------------ (Rs. mill) ------------ Project Preparation 10.5 10.5 Tubewells, Structures and Watercourses 9.9 37.6 37.6 27.9 - 113.0 Duties and Taxes 0.7 2.8 2.8 2.0 - 8.3 Engineering 1.1 4.0 4.0 3.0 - 12.1 Contingencies 2.4 8.9 8.9 6.6 _ 26.7 Subtotal 14.1 53.3 53.3 39.5 - 160.1 Interest during Construction 0.8 4.0 6.4 5.6 2.4 19.2 Total Tubewell Project 14.9 57.3 59.7 45.1 2.4 179.3 Electrification - 5.2 19.5 19.5 14.5 58.7 Duties and Taxes - 0.9 3.5 3.5 2.6 10.5 Engineering and Administration - o.6 2.3 2.3 1.7 6.9 Contingencies - 1.3 5.1 5.1 3.7 15.2 Subtotal - 8.0 30.4 30.4 22.5 91.3 Interest during Construction - 0.5 1.8 1.8 1.4 5.5 Total Electrification - 8.5 32.2 32.2 23.9 96.8 TOTAL FINANCCIAL REQUIREMENTS 25.4 65.8 91.9 77.3 26.3 286.6 1/ Incurred prior to beginning of construction. INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Panjnad Abbasia Comparative Summary Water Budget "With" the Project and "Without" Additional Tubewells 1965 1975 1985 Net Increase "With" the Project "With" "Without" "With" "Without" the Additional the Additional Surface Ground- Existing Project Tubewells Project Tubewells Water water Total -------------- (MAF) -------------- Surface Supplies: Total: 1.81 2.08 1.81 2.20 1.81 0.39 - 0.39 _ _- - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ - - _ _ _ - -_ _ - - - - - -_- -_ _- -_ _- - _- - _- - _- - - - _ _ _ _ _ __-_-_ _ _ __-_ _ _ _- _ - _ _- _ _ _ _ _ Thereof during October to May: - 0.76 0.85 0.76 0.94 0.76 0.18 - 0.18 Groundwater Supplies: 0.27 1.66 0.40 _/ 2.37 3/ 0.40 - 1.97 1.97 Total Supplies: 2.08 3.74 2.21 4.57 2.21 0.39 1.97 2.36 1/ Release period during which reservoirs would be operated for irrigation requirements. 2/ Based on IACA's figures of 1,440 private tubewells in operation by 1969 and an average utilization rate of about 27 percent per annum. 3/ This would include substitution for existing private groundwater exploitation (0.27 MAF) as well as those of further increase in private groundwater extraction. PUBLIC TUBEWELL PROJECT: PANJNAD ABBASIA WATER BALANCE AT ULTIMATE DEVELOPMENT (ALL FIGURES IN MAF) CANAL >1-WATER COURSE->B+< FIELD TRANSPIRATION EVAPORATION I EVAPORATION EVAPORATION 2 98 4, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~RAIN 0.11 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ R 0C Po LU 284 219 456 4.10 287 RIVER RECHARGE IRE- CHARGE IECIRRIGATION R ARGE -RECHARGE I GROUND WATER RESERVOIR m m z x DRAINAGE PUMPING C) (R)I BRD -3326 m1 rl) ANNEX 4.1 APPENDIX 3 INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public TubeweJ. Project Panjnad Abbasia Present IACA Projections 1965 1975 195 0Bank Group Projection Kharif: C o a r s e R i c e 1 4 . 0 2 Z 1 . 0 43 0 0 5 0 2 3 3 1 8. 6 2 7. 9 5 COtton e d .0 9.5 18.5 24.o 9.5 12.0 16.9 24.0o MFaier 10 10.5 14.0 26.0 38.0 10.6 13.4 20.1 38.0 P oddern20.a38. Pulses l/ 220.0 226.0 300.0 430.0 55o.o 233.4 295.6 412. 500 JVF aru5.5 5.6 11.0 20.0 1.0 3.8 11.0 20.0 1.0 Pulses 6.o groundnuts:19 6.6 8.5 - 60.9 8. 2 Rabi:69 5 Wheat 12.0 12.6 19.0 29. 36. 12 FOiledse 75.o 460. 560.0 76O.o 900.0 477.4 604.6 811.9 900.0 gra nds 7. 7.1 9.0 13.5 18.0 7.4 9.4 13.1 18. yraji e8.5l8.5d10.0 14.0 18.0 9.0 1 14 15.5 18. 0 Pulses l0o ..5 14.0 26.0 38.0 10.6 1. 01 3. 5.5 ~5.6 11.0 20.0 310 58 11.0 20.0 31.0 Perenia ls:31 05 8 1 .20 01 0 Fruitc~ (u) 3.035.5 50.0 72.0 88.0 37.1 47.0 65.5 88.0 Feuetabes8o.o 80.0 6o.o 130.0 170.0 84.9 102.0 130.0 170.0 Vegetab1~5 140.o 140.0 170.0 200.0 250.0 148.5 188.1 248.0 250.0 /Pulses thow grorn nut if inldsronn at the following ratios: Pulses to gro n~~~ 8:1965 1968 1975 1985 2000 groundn ratiod: 1:0 1:0 2:1 1:1 1:2 gonntyieldsof pls20 30 40 yield f p~txses: .5 5.6 7.0 11.0 14.0 APPENDIX 3 Page 2 INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Pro ct - Pan,jna Abbasia Yield Projections "Without" Additional Tubewells (Maunds per Acre) Present IACA Projection Bank Group Projection 1965 1968 1975 1985 2000 1968 1975 1985 2000 Kharif: Coarse Rice 14.0 14.1 14.2 21.0 33.0 14.8 18.9 27.9 28.0 Cotton 9.0 9.1 9.2 12.5 16.0 9.5 12.0 16.9 24.0 Maize 10.0 10.5 11.6 13.5 18.0 10.6 12.2 14.9 20.0 Fodder 220.0 226.0 230.0 270.0 320.0 233.4 268.2 326.9 440.0 Pulses 5.5 5.6 5.7 6.8 9.0 5.8 6.7 8.2 11.0 Jowar 6.5 6.6 6.8 7.8 11.0 6.9 7.9 9.7 13.0 Rabi: Wheat 12.0 12.6 13.0 15.5 22.0 12.7 16.1 25.6 36.0 Fodder 45o.o 460.0 455.0 525.0 700.0 477.4 548.5 668.7 900.0 Oilseeds 7.0 7.1 7.2 9.0 12.0 7.4 8.5 10.4 14.0 Gram 8.5 8.5 8.6 10.0 13.0 9.0 10.4 12.6 17.0 Maize 10.0 10.5 11.6 13.5 18.0 10.6 12.2 14.9 20.0 Pulses 5.5 5.6 5.7 6.8 9.0 5.8 6.7 8.2 11.0 Perennials: Sugarcane (Gur) 35.0 35.5 36.0 46.o 60.0 37.1 47.0 65.5 88.0 Fruit 80.0 80.0 85.o 95.o 130.0 84.9 102.0 130.0 170.0 Vegetables 140.0 140.0 145.0 165.0 200.0 1u8.5 170.0 200.0 250.0 INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubevell ProJect - PanJnad Abbasia Revised Projection of Produtjio With the Prject 1975 1985 1989 Cropped Yields Production GPV Cropped Yields Production GPV Cropped Yields Production GPV CroPs Acres (mds/acre) ('000 mds) (Re. mill) Acres (mds/acre) ('000 mds) (Rs. mill) Acres (mds/acre) (OOO mds) (Rs. mill) Kharif: Coarse Rice 17,560 18.9 331.9 2.871 - _ - - - - Cotton 263,400 12.0 3,160.8 9b.824 316,o80 16.9 5,h51.8 160.254 3h 2,ih2o 18.6 6,369.0 191.070 Maize 26,3hO 13.h 353.0 6.531 52,680 20.1 1,058.9 19.590 52,680 23.7 1,248.5 23.097 Fodder 79,020 295.6 23,358.3 - 122,920 412.1 50,655.3 - l1hO,80 4h5.2 62,5hl.7 - Pulses/Groundnuts 17,560 11.0 193.2 h.308 35,120 20.0 705.9 16.229 h3,900 22.5 987.8 23.1ll Jowar/Bajra 17,560 8.5 1h9.3 1.6h2 - - - - - - - Subtotal h2l,4ho 110.176 526,800 196.073 579,h80 237.578 Rabi: Wheat 333,640 16.1 5,371.6 69.831 307,300 25.6 7,866.9 102.270 25h,620 28.0 7,129.A 92.682 Fodder 79,020 60h.6 47,775.5 - 105,360 811.9 85,5l4.8 - l4,14lo 834.7 95,272.7 - Oilseeds 35,120 9.h 330.1 7.757 35,120 13.1 h60.1 10.812 35 120 l4.3 502.2 11.802 GranVPulses 26,250 u.4 299.3 4.271 26,34O 15.5 h08.3 5.818 17,560 16.1 282.7 hs.028 Maize 17,560 13.4 255.3 4.353 26,34O 20.1 529.4 9.795 26,34O 23.7 62h.3 11.549 Green Manure 35,120 - - -_ 79.020 - - _ 87.800 - - - Subtotal 526,710 86.212 579,480 128.694 535,580 120.061 Perennials: Sugarcane 43,900 47.0 2,063.3 37.139 52,680 65.5 3,450.5 62.109 52,680 71.9 3,787.7 68.179 Fruit 17,560 102.0 1,053.6 11.590 26,3h0 130.0 3,424.2 137.666 26,34O 139.6 3,667.0 40.337 Vegetables 8,780 170.0 1,h92.6 16.119 17,560 200.0 3,512.0 38.632 17,560 2h8.7 h,367.2 h8.039 Subtotal io0,420 65.1L8 193,160 138.407 193,160 156.555 on of Crops 261.536 h63.174 51.19h Animal Husbandry 85.300 188.512 228.015 TOTAL on 346.836 651.685 7h2.209 On Farm Costs 2/ 110.988 23h.606 267.195 TOTAL NPV 235.8h8 417.080 h,75.01h 1/ Based on IACA projection but reduced by 5.5% for 1975 and 1965 in keeping with reduction of yield levels, including those of fodder. 2/ 1975 - 32% of GPV 1985 - 36% of GPV 1989 - 36% of OGPV >II INDIJUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Panjnad Abbasia Revised Projection of Production "Without" The Project 1970 1975 1985 1989 Cropped Yields Production GPV Yields Production GPV Yields Production GPV Yields Production GPV Crops Acres (mds./acre) ('000 mds.) (RB. mill) (mds./acre) ('C00 mds.) (Rs. mill) (mds/acre) ('000 mda.) (Rs. mill) (mds/acre) ('000 mds.) (Rs. mill) Kharif: Coarse Rice 21,072 15.5 326.6 3.429 18.9 398.3 3.L1,5 27.9 587.9 5.085 31-4 661.7 5.721, Cotton 228,280 9.9 2,260.0 67.800 12.0 2,739.4 82.182 16.9 3,857.9 115.737 18.6 4,2A6.0 127.380 Maize 10,536 11.0 115.9 2.1144 12.2 128.5 2.377 14.9 157.0 2.905 16.1 170.0 3.145 Fodder 55,134 242.9 13,392.0 - 268.2 14,786.9 - 326.9 18,023.3 - 353.8 19,506.4 - Pulses 6,146 6.1 37.5 o.578 6.7 41.2 o.865 8.2 50.4 1.058 8.8 54.1 1.136 Jowar/Bajra 61,460 7.2 442.5 h.868 7.9 485.5 5.341 9.7 596.2 6.558 10.4 639.2 7.031 Subtotal 382,628 78.819 94.210 131.343 1!b4.416 Rabi, Wheat 254,840 13.2 3,245.1 42.185 16.1 3,958.o 51.454 25.6 6,293.5 81.816 28.0 6,883.5 89.486 Fodder 64,094 496.8 31,841.9 - 548-5 35,155.6 - 668.7 42,859.7 - 723.6 16,378. - Oilseeds 32,486 7.7 250.1 5.877 8.5 276.1 6.488 10.7 337.9 7.941 11.2 363.8 8.5149 Gram 20,194 9.4 189.8 2.705 10.4 210.0 2.993 12.6 254.4 3.625 13.7 276.7 3.943 Pulses 4,390 6.1 26.8 0.563 6.7 29.4 0.617 8.2 36.0 0.756 8.8 38.6 0.811 Subtotal 367,004 51.330 61.552 94.138 10?.789 Perennials: Sugarcane 39,510 38.6 1,525.1 27.451 47.0 1,857.0 33.426 65.5 2,587.9 46.582 71.9 28140.8 51.131 Fruit 8,780 90.3 792.8 8.721 102.0 895.6 9.852 130.0 1,111.4 12.555 139.6 1,225.7 13.483 Vegetables 1,756 154.6 271.5 2.987 170.0 298.5 3.284 200.0 351.2 3.863 218.7 436.7 4.804 Subtotal 100,092 39.159 46.562 63.000 69.121 GPV of Crops 169.308 202.321 288.481 316.626 Animal Husbandry 57.500 65.300 83.000 92.000 TOTAL GPV 226.808 267.62h 371.h81 ho8.626 On-Farm Costs 72.578 85.640 133.733 147.105 TOTAL NPV lSL.230 181.984 237.748 261.521 / Based on IACA Projection. If 1970 - 32% of GPV 1975 - 32% of GPV i 1985 - 36% of GPV 1989 - 36% Of aPV INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project -- Pan,nad - Abbasia Calculation of Rate of Return Cost/ of Incremental NPV 091 and Incremental Benefits R A T E 0 F R E T U R N NPV "With" NPV -Without' Incremental Additional After Allocation to Infrastructure Power Attributable Potential Including Potential Capital Costs Net Benefits Project Costs Year Project Project NPV Surface Water Surface Water and Services 2/ Costs Increment 3/ Private Savings Private Saving o f/ Of Project at 19% 3/ at 22% 4/ at 19% 3/ at 22% L/ ------------------------ (Rs. Million) ----------------------- 1969 - - - - 5.9 5.9 23.9 - 1 .8 22.6 19.5 1970 1514.2 154.2 - - - - 2.1 - 2.1 5.9 3.8 50.5 - 1.5 2.5 4o.6 33.7 1971 159.7 159.0 0.7 - 0.7 - 9.2 - 8.5 5.9 - 2.6 50.5 - 5.2 - 1.4 31i.3 27.5 1972 174.1 164.3 9.8 - 9.8 0.3 17.5 - 8.0 5.q - 2.1 37.,4 - O. -0.9 21.6 16.7 1973 191.0 169.9 21.1 - 21.1 0.7 22.1, - 2.0 5.9 3.9 - - 0.9 1. -4 1974 214.4 175.6 38.8 - 38.8 1.4 22.4 15.0 5.9 20.9 - 5.6 6.2 - 1975 235.8 182.0 53.8 9.9 43.9 1.5 16.9 25.5 5.9 31.1 - 8.0 7.6 - _ 1976 252.h 186.8 65.6 11.5 54.1 1.9 17.4 34.8 5.9 1-0.7 - 9.3 8.1 - _ 1977 270.8 192.0 78.8 13.5 65.3 2.3 17.9 45.1 5.9 51.0 - 10.1 8.3 - _ 1978 287.9 197.2 90.7 15.3 75.4 2.6 18.5 54.3 5.9 60.2 - 10.4 8.0 - - 1979 306.2 202.7 103.5 17.1 86.4 3.0 19.1 64.3 5.9 70.2 - 10.4 7.6 - - 1980 325.3 208.2 117.1 19.0 98.1 3.4 19.6 75.1 5.9 81.0 - 10.3 7.2 - - 1981 343.1 214.0 129.1 21.1 108.0 3.8 20.2 84.0 5.9 89.9 - 9.7 6.5 - - 1982 361.9 219.9 112.0 23.0 119.0 h.2 20.7 94.1 5.9 100.0 - 9.2 5.9 - - 1983 381.5 225.9 155.6 25.2 130.4 4.6 21.3 1014.5 5.9 110.h - 8.7 5.3 - - 1984 399.5 232.1 167.4 27.4 110.0 4.9 21.9 113.2 5.9 119.1 - 7.9 4.7 - 1985 417.1 237.7 179.4 28.7 150.7 5.3 22.14 123.0 5.Q 128.9 - 7.3 4.1 - 1986 431.2 2113.7 187.5 30.7 156.8 5.5 22.4 128.9 5.9 13L.8 - 6.4 3.5 - 1987 445.7 2149.7 196.0 32.8 163.2 5.7 22.k 135.1 5.0 141.0 - 5.8 3.0 - ,, 1988 46o.8 255.7 205.1 35.0 170.1 6.o 22.4 1111.7 5.9 1)47.6 - 5.1 2.6 - 1989 475.0 261.5 213.5 37.3 176.2 6.2 22.4 147.6 5.9 153.5 - 11.4 2.2 _ 116.9 97.2 119.1 97.4 Rate of Return - 19% Rate of Return - 22% ]Charged at average value per acre foot of total incremental water availability? Incremental Value/Acre Foot Incremental Water of Incremental NPV Availabilit lity ( Rs Mill ) (MAF )R 1975 53.8 1.53 35.2 1980 117.1 2.04 57.4° 1985 179.4 2.36 76.o 1989 213.5 2.36 90.5 . Absorption of surface water based on IACA intensity projections beginning in 1975 at 0.282 MaF to 1989 at 0.1411 4AF. Allowance for public expenditures on infrastructure and intensified technical and advisory services. The allowance includest 1.85% of attributable increment for roads. 1.65% of attributable increment for supporting services. Charged on incremental NPV after allocation to surface water only. J Excluding Potential Private Savings. i Including Potential Private Savings. APPENDIX 5 Page 2 INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Panjnad Abbasia Benefit: Cost Ratio Incremental NPV Project Costs Including after Allocation 0 & M Services Discounted at 8% Year to Surface Water and Infrastructure Benefits Costs ------------------------------------ (Rs. Million) ------------------------------ 1/ 2/ 1/ 2/ 1969 23.9 18.0 _ 22.1 16.7 1970 _ 52.6 46.7 _ 45.1 40.0 1971 0.7 59.7 53.8 o.6 47.4 42.7 1972 9.8 55.0 49.1 7.2 40.4 36.1 1973 21.1 23.1 17.2 14.4 15.7 11.7 1974 38.8 23.8 17.9 24.4 15.0 11.3 1975 43.9 18.4 12.5 25.6 10.7 7.3 1976 54.1 19.3 13.4 29.2 10.4 7.2 1977 65.3 20.2 14.3 32.7 10.1 7.2 1978 75.4 21.1 15.2 34.9 9.8 7.0 1979 86.4 22.1 16.2 37.1 9.5 6.9 1980 98.1 23.0 17.1 39.0 9.1 6.8 1981 108.0 24.0 18.1 39.7 8.8 6.7 1982 119.0 24.9 19.0 40.5 8.5 6.5 1983 130.4 25.9 20.0 41.1 8.2 6.3 1984 140.0 26.8 20.9 40.9 7.8 6.1 1985 150.7 27.7 21.8 40.7 7.5 5.9 1986 156.8 27.9 22.0 39.2 7.0 5.5 1987 163.2 28.1 22.2 37.8 6.5 5.1 1988 170.1 28.4 22.5 36.5 6.1 4.8 1989 176.2 28.6 22.7 35.0 5.7 4.5 596.5 311.4 252.3 B/C ratio at 8% 11 1.9 B/C ratio at 8% 2/ 2.4 3/ 1 Before deduction of potential private savings. 2/ After deduction of potential private savings consistent with IACA approach. 3/ If potential private savings are added to benefits stream rather than netted out from cost stream, the Benefit/Cost ratio would be 2.1; that is - Present Worth of Benefit: 596.5 Present Wbrth of Savings: 59.1 655.6 655 .6 B/C Ratio 2.1 311.4 INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Panjnad Abbasia Private Alternative - Rate of Installation and Incremental Water Availability Number of Increase in Incremental Incremental 2/ Wells in Private Wells During Replacement of Number of Wells Water Availability Year Operation V/ Project Period Additional Wells in Operation (MAF) 1965 615 1966 769 1967 961 1968 1,201 1969 1,501 300 300 0.07 1970 1,726 225 525 0.12 1971 1,985 259 784 0.18 1972 2,283 298 1,082 0.24 1973 2,625 342 1,424 0.32 1974 3,019 394 1,818 0.41 1975 3,472 453 2,271 0.51 1976 3,993 521 2,792 0.63 1977 4,591 598 3,390 0.76 1978 4,591 3,390 0.76 1979 4,591 300 3,390 0.76 1980 4,591 225 3,390 0.76 1981 4,591 259 3,390 0.76 1982 4,591 298 3,390 0.76 1983 4,591 342 3,390 0.76 1984 4,591 394 3,390 0.76 1985 4,591 453 3,390 0.76 1986 4,591 521 3,390 0.76 1987 4,591 598 3,390 0.76 1988 4,591 3,390 0.76 1989 4,591 300 3,390 0.76 1/ Rate of installation: 25% p.a. compound growth between 1965 and 1969. This rate of installation i 15% p.a. compound growth between 1969 and 1977. accepts the ceiling for cover- age with private tubewells 2/ Assumed rate of average utilization: 30% stated in the IACA project CY. Each well would pump for about 2,630 hours and produce report. 225 acre feet per annum. INDUS SPECIAL STUY Public Tubewell Project - Panjnad Abbasia Estimate of Incremental NPV of Private Tubewell Alternative Acreage Cropped Ac rpooe d Receivt Acld Itl Expansion of 2/ DnIder U'71tii% ii Overall ?PV of Private NPV Increment Water Acreage Cropped Condition Coi1 -WATER COURSE-+-< FIELD TRANSPIRATION EVAPORATION I EVAPORATION I EVAPORATION I 10 A, O'__ A : 0 07t 1 I I' ARAIN 0.18 094 0 69 1 45 1 31 092 RIVER RECHARGE RE- CHARGE IRRIGATION RECHARGE &-RECHARGE PumpnR g < 0 18A0~1.20g07 0 0 02 6 0 76~~~00 0 76~~~~~~~~~~~~ 4,~~0 GROUND WATER RESERVOIR DRAINAGE PUMPING (R)IBRD-3323 m INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Dipalpur Above B.S. Link Yield Projections "With" the Project (Maunds per Acre) Present IACA P r o j e c t i o n Bank Group Projection 1965 1969 1975 1985 2000 1969 1975 1985 2000 Kharif: Coarse Rice 16.0 19.5 25.0 38.0 50.0 17.3 21.1 30.7 50.0 Fine Rice 14.0 17.0 22.5 32.0 42.5 15.1 18.5 26.9 42.5 Cotton 6.0 7.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 6.5 7.8 11.2 20.0 Maize 10.0 11.3 17.0 26.0 38.0 10.8 13.2 19.7 38.0 Fodder 180.0 205.0 320.0 430.0 550.0 194.8 237.1 345.3 550.0 Pulses 5.0 5.6 7.5 10.0 10.8 5.4 6.5 9.5 14.0 Others 5.0 - - - 5.4 - - - Jowar 6.o 6.7 _ - _ 6.5 - - - Rabi: Wheat 10.0 11.6 19.0 27.5 34.0 10.8 16.7 22.2 34.0 Fodder 450.0 520.0 700.0 840.0 1000.0 489.6 592.8 831.4 1000.0 Oilseeds 5.0 5.8 7.5 10.5 15.0 5.4 6.5 9.5 15.0 Gram 7.0 8.1 10.0 14.0 18.0 7.6 9.2 13.1 18.0 Maize - - 17.0 26.0 38.0 - 13.2 19.7 38.0 Pulses 5.0 5.8 - _ - 5.4 - - - Others 5.0 - - - - 5.4 - - - Perennial: Sugarcane (Gur) 28.0 32.0 44.0 62.0 76.0 30.3 36.8 52.9 76.0 Fruit 80.0 85.0 90.0 130.0 170.0 86.6 90.0 130.0 170.0 X Vegetables 140.0 145.0 170.0 200.0 250.0 151.5 170.0 200.0 250.0 F'H F INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Dipalpur Above B.S. Link Yield Projections 'Without" Additional Tubewells (Maunds per Acre) Present IACA P r o j e c t i o n Bank Group Projection 1965 1969 1975 1985 2000 1969 1975 1985 2000 Kharif: Coarse Rlce 16.0 19.5 20.0 28.8 40.0 17.3 21.1 30.7 50.0 Fine Rice 14.0 17.0 18.0 25.2 34.0 15.1 18.5 26.9 42.5 Cotton 6.o 7.0 8.0 10.0 14.0 6.5 7.3 8.9 20.0 Maize 10.0 11.3 11.9 14.5 17.5 10.8 12.2 14.9 20.0 Fodder 180.0 205.0 215.0 260.0 320.0 194.8 219.4 267.5 360.0 Pulses 5.0 5.6 6.0 7.2 9.0 5.4 6.1 7.4 10.0 Other 5.0 - - - - 5.4 6.1 - - Jowar 6.0 6.7 7.2 8.7 11.0 6.5 7.3 8.9 12.0 Rabi: Wheat 10.0 11.6 13.5 16.0 22.0 10.8 16.7 22.2 34.0 Fodder 450.0 520.0 540.0 650.0 750.0 489.6 548.5 668.7 900.0 Oilseeds 5.0 5.8 6.1 8.0 10.0 5.4 6.1 7.4 10.0 Gram 7.0 8.1 8.5 11.2 14.0 7.6 8.5 10.4 14.0 Maize - - - Pulses 5.0 5.8 6.1 8.0 10.0 5.4 6.1 7.4 10.0 Other 5.0 - - - - 5.4 - - - Perennials: Sugarcane (Gur) 28.0 32.0 35.2 44.0 56.0 30.3 36.8 52.9 76.0 Fruit 80.0 85.0 90.0 105.0 130.0 85.0 90.0 130.0 170.0 m Vegetables 140.0 145.0 150.0 170.0 200.0 151.5 170.0 200.0 250.0 o INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Dipalpur Above B.S. Link Revised Projection of Production "Wit" The Project 1975 1985 1990 Cropped Yields Production GPV Cropped Yields Production GPV Cropped Yields Production GPV Acres (mds/acre) (1000 mds) (Rs. mill) Acres (mds/acre) ('OOO mds) (Rs. mill) Acres (mds/acre) ('000 mds) (Rs. mill) Kharif: Coarse Rice 22,300 21.1 470.5 4.070 14,900 30.7 457.4 3.956 7,400 36.1 267.1 2.310 Fine Rice 40,900 18.5 756.6 11.048 52,100 26.9 1,401.5 20.532 67,000 31.3 2,097.1 30.722 Cotton 37,200 7.8 290.2 8.706 67,ooo 11.5 770.5 23.115 90,400 13.8 1,247.5 37.425 Maize 14,900 13.2 196.7 3.639 1b,900 19.7 293.5 5.430 14,900 24.6 366.5 6.780 Fodder 52,100 237.1 12,352.9 - 59,500 345.3 20,545.4 - 70,700 403.3 28,513.3 - Pulses 8,200 6.5 53.3 1.119 1h,900 9.5 1141.6 2.974 114,900 10.8 160.9 3.379 Subtotal 175,600 28.618 223,300 56.007 265,300 80.616 Rabi: Wheat 163,700 16.7 2,733.8 35.539 156,200 22.2 3,467.6 45.079 111,600 25.6 2,857.0 37.1a1 Fodder 45,000 592.8 26,676.0 - 55,800 831.4 46,392.1 - 55,800 884.3 49,343.9 - Oilseeds 7,400 6.5 48.1 1.130 11,200 9.5 106.1 2.500 11,200 11.1 124.3 2.921 Grass 7,400 9.2 68.1 0.970 7,400 13.1 96.9 1.381 7,4100 1.6 108.0 1.539 Maize 7,400 13.2 97.7 1.807 14,900 19.7 293.5 5.430 11,900 24.6 366.5 6.780 Green Manure 14,900 - - - 29,800 - - - 29,800 - - - Subtotal 245,800 39.446 275,300 54.390 230,700 48.381 Perennial: Sugarcane 16,700 36.8 614.6 11.063 16,700 52.9 883.4 15.901 13,000 59.7 776.1 13.970 Fruit 1,500 90.0 135.0 1.485 7,400 130.0 962.0 1.058 8,900 142.1 1,264.7 13.912 Vegetables 2,200 170.0 374.0 4.114 5,600 200.0 1,120.0 12.320 7,400 215.4 1,594.0 17.534 Subtotal 40,800 16.662 59,400 29.279 58,600 45.416 GPV of Crops 84.726 139.676 174.413 Animal Husbandry-./ 39.900 82.503 110.483 TOTAL GPV 124.626 222.179 284.896 On-Farm Cost,2/ 39.880 .79.98 102.562 TOTAL NPV 84.746 142.195 182.334 I/ Based on IACA projections but reduced proportaonately for 1975 and 1985 in keeping with reduction of yield levels including those of fodder. 2/ 1975 - 32% of GPV 1985 - 36% of GPV 1990 - 36% of GPV INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell ProJect - Dipalpur above B.S. Link Revised Projection of Production "Without" The Project 1971 1975 1985 1990 Cropped Yields Production GPV Yields Production GPV Yields Production GPV Yields Production GPV Acres (mds/acre) ('000 mds) (Rs. mill) (mds/acre) ('000 mds) (Rs. mill) (mds/acre) ('000 mds) (Rs. mill) (mds/acre) ('000 mds) (Rs. mill) Kharif: Coarse Rice 26,000 18.o 468.o 4.921, 21.1 548.6 4.7L5 30.7 798.2 6.904 36.1 938.6 8.119 Fine Rice 31,600 15.8 499.3 8.488 18.5 584.6 8.56(4 26.9 850.0 12.452 31.3 989.1 14.490 Cotton 16,700 6.7 111.9 3.357 7.8 130.3 3.909 11.5 192.0 5.760 13.8 230.5 6.915 Maize 9,300 11.3 105.1 1.944 12.2 113.5 2.100 14.9 138.6 2.564 .9 138.6 2.56h Fodder 37,200 202.7 7,540.4 - 219.4 8,161.7 - 267.5 9,951.0 - 295.2 10,981.h - Pulses 3,700 5.6 20.7 0.435 6.1 22.6 o.475 7.4 27.h 0.575 8.2 30.3 0.636 Jowar/Bajra 12,300 6.7 82.4 0.906 7.3 89.8 0.988 8.9 109.5 1.204 9.8 120.5 1.326 Subtotal 136,800 20.044 20.780 29.459 34.050 Rabi: Wheat 93,000 11.3 1,050.9 13.662 16.7 1,553.1 20.190 22.2 2,064.6 26.840 25.6 2,381.0 30.953 Fodder 40,900 506.7 20,724.0 - 548.5 22,433.6 - 668.7 27,349.8 - 738.0 30,184.2 - Oilseeds 3,700 5.6 20.7 o.486 6.1 22.6 0.531 7.4 27.4 0.644 8.2 30.3 0.712 Gram 3,700 7.9 29.2 o.146 8.5 31. 0.447 10.4 38.5 0.549 11.5 h2.5 0.606 Pulses 7,400 5.6 41.4 0.869 6.1 45.1 0.947 7.4 54.8 1.151 8.2 60e7 1.275 Subtotal 148,700 15.433 22.115 29.184 33.546 Perennials: Sugarcane 14,100 31.5 444.2 7.996 36.8 518.8 9.338 52.9 745.9 13.h26 59.7 8hl.8 15.152 Fruit 1,100 85.8 94.4 1.038 90.0 99.0 1.089 130.0 143.0 1.573 142.1 156.3 1.719 Vegetables 1,900 157.6 299.4 3.293 170.0 323.0 3.553 200.0 380.0 4.180 215.4 h09.3 4.502 Subtotal 34,200 12.327 13.980 19.179 21.373 GPV of Crops 47.804 56.875 77.822 88.969 Animal Husbandry 29.900 35.o00 47.500 56.8Do TOTAL GPV 77.704 91.875 125.322 145.769 On-Farm Costs 2 24.865 29.400 45.116 52.477 TOTAL NPV 52.839 62.475 80.206 93.292 g Based on IACA Projection. 1/ 1971 - 32% of GPV 1975 = 32% of GPV 1985 - 36% of GPv 1990 - 36% of OPV INDtJS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Dipalpur - Above B.S. Link Calculation of Rate of Return R a t e o f R e t u r n Attributable Net Benefit Project Cost Increment At 12S At 25% NPV NPV Cost of Incremental NPV Infrastructure Potential Including Capital Excluding Including "WITH' 3/ "WITHOUT" Incremental Additional after Allocation and 0 & H Attributable Private Potential Costs of Potential Potential Y e a r the proJect. the project NPV Surface Water to Surface Water Services Costs Increment Saving Saving Project Private Saving Private Saving at 12% at 25% -----------------(Rs. million)…------------------ 1969/70 51.7 51.7 - - 7.3 7.3 16.5 - 5.9 16.7 13.2 1970/71 52.8 52.8 - - - - - - 7.3 7-3 34.1 - 4.7 30.8 22.0 1971/72 57.6 54.6 3.0 - 3.0 .1 1.6 1.3 7.3 8.6 13.3 0.9 4.4 10.8 6.9 1972/73 64.3 56.5 7.8 - 7.8 .3 6.1 1.4 7.3 8.7 0.9 3.6 1973/74 70.5 58.4 12.1 - 12.1 .4 7.7 4.0 7.3 11.3 2.4 3.8 1974/75 76.2 60.3 15.9 9.0 6.9 .2 7.7 1.0 7.3 6.3 0.5 1.7 1975/76 82.2 62.5 19.7 10.7 9.0 .3 6.7 2.0 7.3 9.3 1.0 2.0 1976/77 87.7 64.1 23.6 12.5 11.1 .4 6.8 3.9 7.3 11.2 1.7 1.9 1977/78 92.8 65.7 27.1 13.9 13.2 .5 6.9 5.8 7.3 13.1 2.2 1.8 1978/79 98.2 67.4 30.8 15.4 15.4 .5 7.0 7-9 7.3 15.2 2.8 1.7 1979/80 103.7 69.1 34.6 16.4i 18.2 .6 7.1 10.5 7.3 17.8 3.3 1.6 1980/81 109.5 70.9 38.4 17.5 20.9 .7 7.2 13.0 7.3 20.3 3.7 1.5 1981/82 115.7 72.7 43.O 18.7 24.3 .8 7.3 16.2 7.3 23-5 4.1 1.3 1982/83 122.9 74.6 h8.3 20.7 27.6 1.0 7.4 19.2 7.3 26.5 4.4 1.2 1983/84 128.8 76.5 52-3 22.8 29.5 1.0 7.5 21.0 7.3 28.3 4.3 1.0 19814/85 134.0 78.4 55.6 24.2 31.4 1.1 7.6 22.7 7.3 30.0 4.2 0.9 1985/86 137.9 80.2 57.7 25.3 32.4 1.1 7.7 23.6 7.3 30.9 3-9 0.7 1986/87 aI5.0 82.7 62.3 27.5 34.8 1.2 7.7 25.9 7.3 33.2 3.9 o.6 1987/88 152.4 85.3 67.1 29.7 37.h 1.3 7.7 28.4 7.3 35.7 3-8 0.5 1988/89 160.2 88.0 72.2 32.1 40.1 1i4 7.7 31.0 7.3 38-3 3.8 0.5 1989/90 168.4 90.7 77.7 34.6 43.1 1.5 7.7 33-9 7.3 41.2 3.7 0.4 1990/91 176.8 93-3 83.5 37.3 46.2 1.6 7.7 36.9 7.3 44.2 3.6 o.4 58.2 42.1 58.3 42.1 Rate of Return Excluding Potential Private Savings - 12% Rate of Return Including Potential Private Savings - 25% 1/ Charged at average value per acre foot of total incremental water availability: Incremental Value/acre foot Incremental Water of Incremental NPV Availability Availability (Rs. mill) (}!ATY (Fs.) 1975/76 19.7 0.53 37.2 1980/81 38.4 0.68 56.5 1985/86 57.7 0.75 76.9 1990/91 83.5 0.75 111.3 Absorption of surface water based on IACA intensity projections beginning 1975 at 0.278 MAF to 1990 at 0.334 NAF. 2/ Allowance for public expenditures on infrastructure snd intensified technical and advisory services. The allowance includes: 1.85% of attributable increment for roads. 1.65% of attributable increment fbr supporting services. Charged on incremental NPV after allocation to surface water only. 3/ Thia figure includes 3% reduction of NPV, being annual damage due to costs not being included for surface drainage. INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Dipalpur Above B.S. Link Benefit: Cost Ratio Incremental NPV Project Costs Including After Allocation O&M, Services and Discounted at 8% Year to Surface Water Infrastructure Benefits Costs ----- (Rs. Mill)----- 1/ 2/ 1/ 2/ 1969/70 16.5 9.2 _ 15.3 8.5 1970/71 _ 34.1 26.8 - 29.2 23.0 1971/72 3.0 14.0 6.7 2.4 11.1 5.3 1972/73 7.8 6.4 - 0.9 5.7 4.7 - 0.7 1973/74 12.1 8.1 0.8 8.2 5.5 0.5 1974/75 6.9 7.9 o.6 4.4 5.0 0.4 1975/76 9.0 7.0 -0.3 5.2 4.1 - 0.2 1976/77 11.1 7.2 - 0.1 6.0 3.9 - 0.1 1977/78 13.2 7.4 0.1 6.6 3.7 0-.1 1978/79 15.4 7.5 0.2 7.1 3.5 0.1 1979/80 18.2 7.7 o.4 7.8 3.3 0.2 1980/81 20.9 7.9 o.6 8.3 3.1 0.2 1981/82 24.3 8.1 0.8 8.9 3.0 0.3 1982/83 27.6 8.4 1.1 9.4 2.9 0.4 1983/84 29.5 8.5 1.2 9.3 2.7 0.4 1984/85 31.4 8.7 1.4 9.2 2.5 0.4 1985/86 32.4 8.8 1.5 8.8 2.4 0.4 1986/87 34.8 8.9 1.6 8.7 2.2 0.4 1987/88 37.4 9.0 1.7 8.7 2.1 0.4 1988/89 40.1 9.1 1.8 8.6 2.0 0.4 1989/90 43.1 9.2 1.9 8.6 1.8 0.4 1990/91 46.2 9.3 2.0 8.5 1.7 0.4 150.4 115.7 41.2 B/C ratio at 8% - 1.3- B/C ratio at 8% / 3.7 3 1/ Before deduction of potential private savings / After deduction of potential private savings; consistent with IACA approach 3/ If potential private savings are added to benefits stream rather than netted out from cost stream, the Benefit/Cost ratio would be 1.9; that is, Present worth of Benefit: 150.4 224.9 Present worth of Savings: 74.5 B/C ratio 1157= 1.9 Total 2214.9 INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Dipalpur Above B.S. Link Private Alternative - Rate of Installation and Incremental Water Availability Number of Increase in Private Incremental;- Wells in 1/ Wells During Project Replacement of Incremental Number Water Availability Year Operation - Period Additional Wells Of Wells in Operation (MAF) 1965 860 1966 1,032 1967 1,238 1968 1,485 1969 1,782 297 297 0.07 1970 1,960 178 475 0.11 1971 2,156 196 671 0.15 1972 2,372 216 887 0.20 1973 2,609 237 1,124 0.25 1974 2,870 261 1,385 0.31 1975 3,157 287 1,672 0.38 1976 3,157 1,672 0.38 1977 3,157 1,672 0.38 1978 3,157 1,672 0.38 1979 3,157 297 1,672 0.38 1980 3,157 178 1,672 0.38 1981 3,157 196 1,672 0.38 1982 3,157 216 1,672 0.38 1983 3,157 237 1,672 0.38 1984 3,157 261 1,672 0.38 1985 3,157 287 1,672 0.38 1986 3,157 1,672 0.38 1987 3,157 1,672 0.38 1988 3,157 1,672 0.38 1989 3,157 297 1,672 0.38 1990 3,157 178 1,672 0.38 1/ Rate of installation: 20% p.a. compound growth between 1965 and 1969. This rate of installation accepts the d t 10% p.a. compound growth between 1969 and 1975. ceiling for coverage with private tube- wells stated in the IACA project report . O~ 2/ Assumed rate of average utilization: 30% Each well would pump for about 2,630 hours and produce 225 acre feet per annum. INDUS SPECIAL STUDY Public Tubewell Project - Dipalpur Above the B.S. Link Rate of Return of Private Tubewell Alternative Incremental NPV Benefit/Cost Ratio Rate of Return after allocation to Infrastructure O&M Capital Total Benefits Costs Benefits Costs Y e a r Surface Water & Services / Costss 2-Cos-ts Costs at 8% at 8% at 52% at 52% -Ca-----(s. miiTF----- 1969/70 - - 1.2 3.0 4.2 - 3.9 - 1970/71 3.0 0.2 1.9 1.8 3.9 2.5 3.3 2.8 - 1971/72 7.8 0.3 2.6 2.0 4.9 6.2 3.9 1.6 1.3 1972/73 12.1 0.4 3.5 2.2 6.2 8.9 4.5 1.4 2.2 1973/74 6.9 o.4 4.4 2.4 7.4 4.7 4.8 1.2 2.3 1974/75 9.0 0.3 5.4 2.6 8.3 5.7 5.2 0.9 0.9 1975/76 11.1 0.4 6.5 2.9 9.8 6.5 5.7 0.7 0.7 1976/77 13.2 0.5 6.5 - 7.0 7.1 3.8 0.5 0.6 1977/78 15.4 0.5 6.5 7.1 7.7 3.5 0.2 0.5 1978/79 18.2 0.7 6.5 - 7.2 8.4 3.3 0.2 0.4 1979/80 20.9 0.8 6.5 3.0 10.3 9.0 4.4 0.1 0.3 1980/81 2h.3 0.9 6.5 1.8 9.2 9.7 3.6 0.1 0.2 1981/82 27.6 1.0 6.5 2.0 9.5 10.1 3.5 0.1 0.2 1982/83 29.5 1.1 6.5 2.2 9.8 10.0 3.3 - 0.1 1983/84 31.4 1.2 6.5 2.4 10.1 9.9 3.2 - 0.1 1984/85 32.4 1.2 6.5 2.6 10.3 9.5 3.0 - 0.1 1985/86 34.8 1.3 6.5 2.9 10.7 9.4 2.9 - _ 1986/87 37.4 1.4 6.5 - 7.9 9.4 2.0 - - 1987/88 40.1 1.5 6.5 _ 8.0 9.3 1.8 - 1988/89 43.1 1.6 6.5 - 8.1 9.2 1.7 - 1989/90 46.2 1.7 6.5 3.0 11.2 9.2 2.2 - 162.4 73.5 9.8 9.9 B/C Ratio at 8% 2.2 1/ Based on a charge of 3.5% of incremental NPV as under public tubewell program. 2/ Based on average annual O&M costs per tubewell of Rs. 3,900. 3/ Based on average cost of tubewell of Rs. 10,000 and assumed rate of installation (see Annex 6, page 1).