December 29, 2005

Thursday

Ziqa’ad 26, 1426

Report of Technical Commitee on Water Resources: Text-3

ISLAMABAD : The following is the third part of the text of the background, logistics and procedures and the summary of conclusions and recommendations by the chairman of the Technical Committee on Water Resources to the president and the prime minister.

(iv) It has been stated by seven members of Technical Committee that as a consequence of Indus Waters Treaty the utilizable waters of Jhelum and Chenab Rivers including Mangla storage were consumed as replacement supplies and transferred to Eastern River canals through upper links. However, this statement has not been supported with facts and figures from the recorded river flow data. To access the correct position the table giving average inflows of Jhelum and Chenab Rivers and Eastern Rivers contribution as compared to Water Accord allocations of the tributary canals of Jhelum - Chenab System, based on WAPDA’s figure is given below:

Average inflows of Jhelum and Chenab Rivers and Eastern Rivers contribution, compared with Water Accord allocations of Jhelum-Chenab System (Based on WAPDA's figures)

(v) From the above table it is apparent that the river flows of Jhelum - Chenab rivers are more than adequate for meeting the Kharif water requirements of the tributary areas, (including the Eastern River canals) both in upper and lower zones as well as filling of Mangla reservoir even after raising. There is therefore no justification for transfer of water to the lower tributary areas through TP and CJ link canals during Kharif. However, river supplies of Jhelum and Chenab rivers during Rabi are adequate only for the upper tributary areas of the Punjab even without availability of stored water, but if the lower tributary areas were also to get Rabi water from Jhelum — Chenab rivers, there will be some shortfall which will be required to be met from storages.
(vi) The lower Punjab Tributary areas linked to Indus through CJ and TP links should not be treated as permanent burden on Indus main. If this unrealistic proposition is adhered to, the proposals for constructing new reservoirs on Indus will be in serious jeopardy, because there will remain no surplus water for storage in Indus main.
(vii) The estimated water requirements for CJ and TP link canals indicated by the seven members of the Technical Committee are different from the Accord allocations as per comparison given in the table:

Figures in MAF

(viii) As explained in para 4.3.3 (iii) above, the CJ and TP Link canals are neither flood canals nor perennial canals, but they are enabling devices to transfer the share of water to lower Punjab canals from Indus River depending on the water availability in the three Western Rivers at any stage of time. However, under normal conditions no transfer of water through these link canals is required in Kharif season.
(ix) According to the figures given in WAPDA’s presentation, TP and CJ Link canals were operated in shortage periods of April to June while at the same time water was being stored in Mangla reservoir (Annexure II-11), indicating that there was no shortage in Tributary areas. No reasons for this type of regulation are explained by IRSA, WAPDA or seven members. This arbitrary practice is highly regrettable.
4.4 Guidelines for operational criteria for link canals and future reservoirs
4.4.1 Neither WAPDA nor IRSA has given any proposal for operation criteria of link canals and future reservoirs. Seven members of the Technical Committee have not even mentioned about the operational criteria of future reservoirs in their report of May 2005. It is however important that clear and specific operational criteria be laid down for link canals and future reservoirs, as envisaged in the TOR. The following guiding principles for operation of link canals and future reservoirs are proposed:
A. Guiding principles for operation of link canals (CJ and TP Links)
1. Water may not be transferred from Indus main to lower tributary areas through CJ and / or TP link canals in any 10- daily period, unless the Water Accord shares of the canals on Indus main according to 10-daily statements approved by CCI are satisfied.
2. Under normal conditions no transfer of water from Indus to lower Tributary canals though CJ and TP link canals would be required in Kharif season, as sufficient water is usually available in Jhelum and Chenab rivers during this season. However, water may be transferred from Indus main to lower tributary canals through CJ and / or TP link canals only if in a 10-daily period, sufficient water is not available in Jhelum and Chenab rivers (including Mangla reservoir) after meeting the Water Accord shares of the Upper tributary canals to satisfy the share of Water Accord allocations of the lower tributary canals according to 10-daily statements approved by CCI.
3. No water should be transferred from Indus main to the lower tributary canals through CJ and / or TP link canals during the periods when water is being stored in Mangla reservoir.
4. CJ and TP Link Canals are inter-Provincial canals and should be operated as such, and not on the basis of indent of just one province.
B. Guiding principles for operation of future reservoirs
1. The storage of water in future reservoirs will be made only during the periods when surplus water is available after satisfying the indents of the provinces based on their 10-daily allocations under the Water Accord, approved by CCI, and the requirements of out low to sea (10 MAF) or revised quantity decided by Federal Government on the basis of the result of studies being conducted by consultants / International Panel of Experts.
2. The filling of future reservoirs on Indus main will normally start only after Tarbela reservoir has attained its maximum conservation level of 1550 feet. However, in exceptional circumstances when more water is available at a particular stage of time than can be safely stored in Tarbela reservoir, the excess quantity may be stored in a new reservoir.
3. The operation of reservoirs will be done with due regard to the requirements of sediment flushing during the period June- July.
4. The following priorities will be observed for release of water stored in future reservoirs:
i. The stored water will First be utilized to meet the shortfall in Water Accord allocations in each 10 daily period based on the canal-wise provincial allocations approved by CCI.
ii. The balance water will be distributed amongst provinces under para 4 of the Accord i.e. ratio 37:37:14:12 for Punjab, Sindh, NWFP and Balochistan respectively.
5. The water from future storages will not be distributed on the basis of their full storage capacity, but on the basis of expected annual availability, considering that the reservoirs may not be filled up every year, and may even remain unfilled for a number of consecutive years.
6. The above guiding principles will apply to all reservoirs on Indus River system and its tributaries, except small reservoirs constructed for non-agricultural purposes like urban water supply.
4.5 Conclusions and recommendations
1. IRSA has stated that the designed discharge of CJ and TP links are only notional and that the actual operation of these canals depends on actual water availability in the rivers and on the principle of equitable water distribution according to Water Accord allocation in each 10-daily period. However in practice this principle is not being followed.
2. It has been stated that CJ and TP link canals have been constructed as replacement works under the Indus Waters Treaty and that they have certain designed discharges. However each and every canal of Indus river system has its designed discharge. Under the Treaty new sources have been provided to the canals located on Ravi and Sutlej rivers whose supplies got disconnected but these canals have to share the water available in Western Rivers equitably under the provisions of Water Accord. No canal, whether constructed before or after the Treaty has any privileged position.
3. It is not correct that the water of Jhelum and Chenab rivers has been consumed in the canals of upper tributary areas. During Kharif, Jhelum and Chenab rivers have enough water not only for upper tributary areas, but also for lower Tributary areas and for Mangla storage even after raising. There is therefore no justification for operation of CJ and TP link canals during Kharif under normal conditions.
4. The lower Punjab Tributary areas linked to Indus through CJ and TP links cannot be treated as permanent burden on Indus main. If this unrealistic proposition is adhered to, the proposals for constructing new reservoirs on Indus will be in serious jeopardy, because there will remain no surplus water for storage in Indus main.
5. CJ and TP Link Canals are inter-Provincial canals and should be regulated as such IRSA should not regulate these canals on the basis of the indent of one province, but these canals should be operated on the basis of principle of equitable distribution of water under Water Accord, on all Pakistan basis.
6. WAPDA and IRSA have not proposed any draft for operation of link canals, nor they have proposed the same for future reservoirs. TCWR has been assigned the responsibility to examine these criteria under this TOR. The guiding principles for operation of link canals and reservoirs have therefore to be prepared. The following guiding principles are proposed.
A. Guiding principles for operation of link canals (CJ and TP Links)
1. Water may not be transferred from Indus main to lower tributary areas through CJ and / or TP link canals in any 10- daily period, unless the Water Accord shares of the canals on Indus main according to 10-daily statements approved by CCI are satisfied.
2. Under normal conditions, no transfer of water from Indus to lower Tributary canals though CJ and TP link canals would be required in Kharif season, as sufficient water is usually available in Jhelum and Chenab rivers during this season. However, water may be transferred from Indus main to lower tributary canals through CJ and / or TP link canals only if in a 10-daily period, sufficient water is not available in Jhelum and Chenab rivers (including Mangla reservoir), after meeting the Water Accord shares of the Upper tributary canals, to satisfy the share of Water Accord allocations of the canals according to 10- daily statements approved by CCI.
3. No water should be transferred from Indus main to the lower tributary canals through CJ and / or TP link canals during the periods when water is being stored in Mangla reservoir.
4. CJ and TP Link Canals are inter-Provincial canals and should be operated as such, and not on the basis of indent of just one province.
B. Guiding principles for operation of future reservoirs
1. The storage of water in future reservoirs will be made only during the periods when surplus water is available after satisfying the indents of the provinces based on their 10-daily allocations under the Water Accord, approved by CCI, and the requirements of outflow to sea (10 MAF) or revised quantity decided by Federal Government on the basis of the result of studies being conducted by consultants / International Panel of Experts.
2. The filling of future reservoirs on Indus main will normally start only after Tarbela reservoir has attained its maximum conservation level of 1550 feet. However, in exceptional circumstances when more water is available at a particular stage of time than can be safely stored in Tarbela reservoir, the excess quantity may be stored in a new reservoir.
3. The operation of reservoirs will be done with due regard to the requirements of sediment flushing during the period June- July.
4. The following priorities will be observed for release of water stored in future reservoirs:
i. The stored water will first be utilized to meet the shortfall in Water Accord allocations in each 10-daily period based on the canal-wise provincial allocations approved by CCI.
ii. The balance water will be distributed amongst provinces under para 4 of the Accord i.e. ratio 37 : 37 : 14 : 12 for Punjab, Sindh, NWFP and Balochistan respectively.
5. The water from future storages will not be distributed on the basis of their full storage capacity, but on the basis of expected annual availability, considering that the reservoirs may not be filled up every year, and may even remain unfilled for a number of consecutive years.
6. The above guiding principles will apply to all reservoirs on Indus river system and its tributaries, except small reservoirs constructed for non-agricultural purposes like urban water supply.

TOR-2
5. TOR-2 “Assess the need for constructing dams / reservoirs for future requirements and to make up for the shortages of water due to silting of Tarbela and Mangla dams and recommend sequencing of future storages”.
5.1 Need for constructing dams / reservoirs
5.1.1 Reservoirs are needed to store and regulate surplus water in rivers so that it can be conserved for meeting the needs for food and energy of the country’s growing population. Reservoirs are also needed for harnessing the potential for generation of hydropower which provides cheap source of energy.
5.1.2 The construction of storage reservoirs depends upon the water availability potential. It also depends on the pattern of water availability. These aspects have been examined and discussed under TOR-4(a) of this report. It will be prudent if these factors are kept in view while planning the future reservoirs.
5.1.3 At present we have two major reservoirs in Pakistan i.e. Mangla and Tarbela. There have been reductions in their storage capacities due to silting. It is important to ensure that the silt deposition in the present and future reservoirs should be reduced to the extent possible, and that efficient arrangements should be made for silt extrusion by providing adequate flushing capabilities in the design of the reservoirs and the efficient management of these sediment sluicing devices.
5.1.4 Apprehensions have been expressed about the operation of Mangla reservoir. It is therefore necessary to examine the operations of Mangla dam and also prescribe the operational criteria of future reservoirs. This has been done under TOR-5(a) and 5(b) of this report.
5.1.5 The sequencing of future dams / reservoirs has to be guided by the important factors like trapping maximum possible surplus water whenever it is available. It would also depend upon yielding maximum benefits at the lesser cost.
5.2 Presentation on TOR-2 by WAPDA and response by Planning and Development Division
5.2.1 WAPDA made the presentation on TOR-2 in the seventh meeting of Technical Committee held on 11th January 2005. The deliberations on the TOR were held in the subsequent session of the seventh meeting and continued in the eighth meeting of the Technical Committee.
5.2.2 Mr Sardar Ahmad Mughal, member Sindh gave his comments on WAPDA’s presentation which were responded by WAPDA.
5.2.3 Ch. Mazhar Ali member Punjab had earlier circulated a note about Basha and Kalabagh Dams, and their prioritization. The note was also considered by the Committee. Moreover Mr M.H. Siddiqi, member Punjab also sent a note which was also considered by the Committee.
5.2.4 Planning and Development Division forwarded their note dated 6th January 2005 alongwith their response to the points relating to TOR-2 Planning and Development Division have also provided on 10th January 2005, the details about financial allocations for water sector including future storages.
5.3 Views of WAPDA, seven members of Technical Committee and comments of Chairman, TCWR on the points arising from the presentations and deliberations on TOR-2.
5.3.1 Need for reservoirs
5.3.1.1 WAPDA’s views
(i) Reservoirs are required to meet the needs of food and energy for rapidly increasing population. They are also needed to cater for fast depleting on-line storages and to harness the large spates of uncontrolled flood flows to sea. Further the future reservoirs are needed for effective and complete river regulation and to optimize water / power benefits.
(ii) Without adequate water supply from storage no crop can achieve full production.
5.3.1.2 Views of seven members, TCWR
In their report of May 2005, the seven members of Technical Committee have supported WAPDA’s views regarding need for future storages. The seven members have also stated that river storage dams are water conservation structures and do not consume water. They have further stated that in Pakistan existing live storage capacity is less than 10% of average annual river flows while the world average is 40%. They have further mentioned that Aswan dam on Nile river in Egypt has the capacity of more than double the annual flows of Nile river and it helps Egypt to tide over the cycle of extreme drought in dry years.
5.3.1.3 Comments of Chairman, TCWR
(i) No doubt there is need for construction of reservoirs to meet the increasing need of food and fiber as well as for generation of hydropower. However, in Pakistan the future reservoirs have to be planned keeping in view the water availability potential in the Western Rivers. The guiding principle should be that every drop of surplus water whenever available should be stored. This has been unanimously agreed in the fifth meeting of the Technical Committee held on 22nd November 2004.
(ii) Reservoirs are needed to off-set effects of silting of reservoirs. However, there is need for efficient operation of sediment sluicing and silt reducing measures. This aspect will be discussed further in subsequent paragraphs.
(iii) It is correct that the reservoirs are water conservation structures and do not consume water. However, they store the surplus water when available. It is, therefore, necessary to assess availability of surplus water for storage. This aspect has been discussed under TOR-4(a). The world average storage capacity of 40% of river inflow has been mentioned by the seven members of Technical Committee without any details of even one river basin study. The storage capacity requirements vary from river basin to basin. This depends on the hydrology, annual and long term river flow patterns, existing water use commitments, topography of the river basin etc. The example of Aswan dam quoted by seven members points out the importance of a storage reservoir’s capability for storing large quantity of surplus water during occasional floods for use in subsequent drought years. It must however be noted that the storages cannot be planned or built simply to conform to certain percentage of river flows at a flat rate, but these have to be planned according to the requirements of a particular river basin.
5.3.2 Silting of reservoirs
5.3.2.1 WAPDA’s Views
According to the figure provided by WAPDA in their presentation the gross storage capacity of three existing reservoirs (Tarbela, Mangla and Chashma) has reduced from 18.37 MAF to 13.82 MAFF and the live storage capacity has reduced from 15.74 MAF to 12.54 MAF due to siltation. Thus the reduction in the gross storage capacity is 4.55 MAF and live storage capacity has reduced by 3.20 MAF. The annual average loss of live storage in Mangla dam has been about 0.021 MAF per year and that of Tarbela reservoir has been 0.065 MAF per year. The silting rate of Tarbela dam as mentioned by WAPDA is more than that predicted at design stage and the rate of sedimentation of Mangla dam is less than predicted at design stage. According to WAPDA’s projection, at the present rate of silting, Tarbela dam will lose 25% of its live storage capacity upto the year 2010 and 31% upto the year 2020. Mangla will lose 17% of live storage capacity upto year 2010 and 22% of its live storage capacity upto the year 2020.
5.3.2.2 Views of seven members, TCWR
In their report of May 2005, the seven members of Technical Committee have not given any specific views on the silting of reservoirs.
5.3.2.3 Views of Chairman, TCWR
The figures of silting of reservoirs presented by WAPDA are based on the recorded data. The quantum of silting in live storage capacity is more relevant for knowing the net utilizable water availability. In the three existing reservoirs it is 3.2 MAF. This loss of 3.2 MAF in live storage capacity will nearly be balanced by raising of Mangla dam which is in progress.
5.3.3 TAMS’ report on silting of Tarbela dam
5.3.3.1 Views of WAPDA
(a) WAPDA has stated that the detailed management study was carried out by TAMS in association with a British Firm HR Wellingford in 1998. Main recommendations of this report are:-
(i) By the year 2008 an underwater dyke should be constructed to protect the intakes of the Right Bank Tunnels, the crest of the dyke should be at 1381 ft. (AMSL).
(ii) By the year 2015, a by-pass should be constructed for flushing out the sediments. The by-pass should comprise four new tunnels to be built between the service and Auxiliary Spillways.
(iii) Dredgers having very high dredging capacity should be procured for dredging the intake channel required for carrying the silt laden water to the new tunnels.
(b) WAPDA has further stated that:
(i) The estimated cost of the measures proposed by TAMS was indicated as US $ 663 million.
(ii) WAPDA did not agree with the recommendations of TAMS’ report and as such it was not implemented.
(iii) However, WAPDA has stated that they are fully alive to the sedimentation problem of Tarbela dam and is exploring all possible avenues to prolong the life of reservoir. WAPDA is also planning to organize an international seminar on sedimentation.
5.3.3.2 Views of members, TCWR
In their report of May 2005, the seven members of Technical Committee have not given any views on TAMS’ report and the measures for controlling / reducing the siltation of Tarbela reservoir. However, Mr Sardar Ahmad Mughal has stated in his note enclosed with the report of seven members that the solution should be found to the silting of Tarbela dam and TAMS’ report should not be discarded.
5.3.3.3: Views of Chairman, TCWR
During the deliberation on the subject in the meetings of the Technical Committee, the Chairman had made the following observations:
(i) The study was considered necessary and it was entrusted to TAMS’ by WAPDA itself, and WAPDA must have discussed the approach of consultants and their recommendations with them during and after the study.
(ii) WAPDA should have taken some specific decisions at its level or in higher forum regarding accepting or otherwise, of all or some of TAMS’ recommendations, with or without modifications.
(iii) WAPDA should have clearly stated whether they feel that no more studies were needed for silting problem of Tarbela and that we have to live with present situation.
(iv) His other concern is about silting to Tarbela as to whether it is curable or not. WAPDA should have come up with definite strategy by now. In case TAMS’ report was found not feasible, why it was not stopped at an early stage.
(v) It is felt that the acute silting problem of Tarbela reservoir can not be solved by holding a seminar as proposed by WAPDA. TAMS are a firm of International repute and therefore it was engaged by WAPDA to study the silting problem of Tarbela reservoir and suggest remedial measures. If WAPDA was not entirely satisfied with TAMS thinking they should have given their feed back to TAMS during the currency of consultancy assignment. Even after the expiry of consultancy period if no satisfactory outcome was achieved, the period could have been extended and further deliberations or investigations carried out to come to some definite and positive conclusions. It is highly regrettable that this important report of consultants submitted in 1998 has still not been formally accepted or rejected.
(vi) Apprehensions have been expressed that the silting of Tarbela reservoir is due to improper operation of the sediment sluicing devices. Though WAPDA has not accepted this version, still it seems that there is some thing wrong some where.
(vii) Tarbela is a national asset and its silting problem should be a matter of serious concern. Surely the problem is not such for which solution can not be found.
5.3.4: WAPDA Vision 2025 Programme
5.3.4.1: WAPDA’s Views
WAPDA has stated that the Vision 2025 Programme provides the storage potential of 59.43 MAF on Indus River System. They have further stated that 59.43 MAF is the total storage potential that can be developed on the system. On completion of feasibility studies in a phased manner only most attractive projects would be selected for implementation.
5.3.4.2: Views of seven members, TCWR
In their report of May 2005, the seven members of the TCWR have supported WAPDA’s views.
5.3.4.3: Comments of Chairman, TCWR
WAPDA have identified the potential of 59.43 MAF for storage on Indus River System, but they have not included the computations of water availability or even made any mention of it in the Vision 2025 Programme document. Moreover they have not stated in the document that the storage potential of 59.43 MAF only identified the available storage sites and that the actual implementation will be subject to water availability. It is regrettable that importance of water availability computations has not been appreciated.
5.3.5: Report of World Commission on Dams
5.3.5.1: Views of Planning and Development Division.
The Planning and Development Division have stated that the parameters / conditions recommended in the World Commission on Dams (WCD) Report will be followed in line with national policies and law of the land.
5.3.5.2: Wapda’s Views
(a) Dams and Development Report of 2000 has suggested the following approach:
* Gaining public acceptance
* Comprehensive options assessment
* Addressing existing dams
* Sustaining river and livelihood
* Recognizing entitlements and sharing benefits
* Ensuring compliance
* Sharing river for peace, development and security
(b) Dams and Development Report of 2000, has not been accepted by most of the developing countries.
(c) Pakistan is in a worse situation than many developing countries and if two dams are not built urgently we will lose both the development and environment of the country.
(d) WCD report was of recommendatory nature and as part of global circulation also furnished to GOP.
5.3.5.3: Views of seven members, TCWR
In their report of May 2005, the seven members of TCWR have not given any views on the report of World Commission on Dams.
5.3.5.4: Comments of Chairman, TCWR
(i) In their report of November 2000, the World Commission on Dams has identified and examined the different aspects of construction of dams in consideration of the experiences gained so far all over the World. The report has focused on both positive and negative aspects, and it has not been stated specifically whether dams should or should not constructed.
(ii) The World Commission on Dams has highlighted five fundamental principles for reservoirs i.e.
* Equity
* Efficiency
* Participatory decision-making
* Sustainability
* Accountability
These fundamental principles alongwith those listed in WAPDA’s own comments are such that no one should ignore them.
(iii) The World Commission on Dams Report has been received by WAPDA and Ministry of Water and Power in 2000, but no specific decision on the recommendations has yet been taken at appropriate level. This is highly regrettable.
5.3.6: Constructing storage reservoirs even if they may not be filled for a number of consecutive years in drought periods.
5.3.6.1: Views of Planning and Development Division.
Water reservoirs are needed for better and efficient utilization of scarce water resources.
5.3.6.2: Views of WAPDA
At this point in time, water for additional storage is available without any doubt. Firstly on the average 34.7 MAF is flowing to the sea. Secondly due to sedimentation we have lost about 5 MAF of existing storages which is going to sea. Environmental changes due to global warming are causing severe droughts as well as floods. But as we don’t have any feasible site for a carryover reservoir, we should have as many as possible dams on main Indus and tributaries.
5.3.6.3: Views of seven members, TCWR
The seven members of Technical Committee, in their report of May 2005, have not given any specific views on this point. However, the Technical Committee on Water Resources decided in the fifth meeting held on 22nd November 2004, that every drop of surplus water whenever available should be stored.
5.3.6.4: Views of Chairman, TCWR
It should be borne in mind that considering the water availability scenario as elaborated under TOR-4(a), there is no more surplus water available for inter-seasonal transfer (Kharif to Rabi of the same year), after construction of Mangla and Tarbela dams. The surplus water at present is available only from occasional flood flows. These surplus flows are of higher magnitude but of lesser frequency. Under the circumstances, the future dams may not be filled every year and in fact they may remain un-filled for a number of consecutive years in drought periods. Thus the filling of future dams will be an occasional even, as compared to existing dams in which even partial filling in a year is considered an unusual phenomenon. The operational criteria of future reservoirs should therefore take note of this eventuality.
5.3.7: Time required for feasibility studies of carry-over dam
5.3.7.1: WAPDA’s Views
(i) Comprehensive feasibility study for any big dam requires a very long period. The study has to be prepared in stages, reconnaissance, pre-feasibility, detailed feasibility, design / tender documents, which takes about 4-5 years. As studies involve lot of expenditure viability of the project is ensured before embarking on the next stage. Only Katzarah / Skardu dam on Indus is being pointed out by some quarters as a possible carryovers reservoir. Pre-feasibility study of this dam has been taken in hand in September 2003, at a cost of 70.0 million with 2 years completion period. So far topographic surveys and initial / environmental impact assessment studies have been carried out which have revealed that:
(ii) Skardu / Katzarah Dam site has great resettlement issues, which in practical terms, render its viability doubtful.
(iii) Purpose of a carryover dam could also be achieved by constructing all the 3 dams i.e. Kalabagh, Basha and Akhori.
5.3.7.2: Views of seven members, TCWR
In their report of May 2005, the seven members of TCWR have not given any views on this aspect
5.3.7.3: Comments of Chairman, TCWR
(i) Taking into consideration hydrology of Indus River System and the scenario of water availability for future storages as discussed under TOR-4(a), which indicates that large quantities of surplus water are available only in a few high flood years, the feasibility study for carryover dam should have been initiated by WAPDA much much earlier. However as stated by WAPDA, the pre-feasibility study of Katzarah / Skardu dam has been started only recently in September 2003, and it is expected to be completed in September 2005. It is important that the detailed feasibility study is also undertaken without further delay. All the positive and negative aspects of the project should be thoroughly studied and clear and specific decision taken at highest level of government for this project, which is probably the only available site for carryover dam. It should also be noted that the foremost criterion for future dams will be its capability to trap maximum quantities of surplus water when available. Skardu / Katzarah dam has a large storage capacity of about 35 MAF which will enable a major portion of the surplus water to be stored and regulated.
(ii) WAPDA should not have focused on the negative aspects of the carryover dam even before its feasibility has been prepared. This attitude indicates their biased approach towards this important dam site.
(iii) WAPDA has stated that the purpose of carryover dam can be achieved by constructing three dams. They have however not considered costs involved and time factor. Moreover, even the suggested three dams at Kalabagh, Basha and Akhori will have total capacity of about 18 MAF, which is only half the capacity of carryover dam at Skardu / Katzarah. Apparently a number of smaller dams can not be a substitute for a carryover dam of large capacity which is needed under our conditions.
5.3.8: Sequencing of reservoirs
5.3.8.1: Basis of Planning, Prioritizing and Sequencing of future reservoirs.
(a) Views of Planning and Development Division
(i) Water reservoirs are needed for better and efficient utilization of scarce water resources.
(ii) Prioritizing and sequencing depends on need for water and energy and readiness for implementation on the basis of feasibility, planning and design.
(b) Views of WAPDA
(i) Rivers Sutlej, Beas, Ravi and Chenab have no suitable dam site in Pakistan. The only suitable site on River Jhelum at Mangla has already been exploited to its maximum.
(ii) Large mid Kharif surplus on the Indus and its relative reliability suggests that future sites for storage development following Mangla and Tarbela should be on the Indus. Consequently, on Indus the following major storage sites have been identified during the last 50 years.
(a) Kalabagh
(b) Basha - Diamer
(c) Skardu
(d) Yugo (Shyok)
(c) Akhori (Tarbela off-channel)
(iii) The above promising sites were considered over a number of years and some of them are in the different stages of planning and design.
(iv) The important aspect of trapping the maximum quantity of surplus water as and when available should be guiding factor with due consideration of site, type (carryover, non-carryover) and hydrology of each specific project.

Continued on next page