Document of

The World Bank

FOR OFFMCIAL USE ONLY

MICROFICHE COPY

Report No. 10461-PAK Type: (SAR)AHMAD, M. / X82126 / E9 018/ 'A3AG

STAFF APPRAISAL REPORT

PAKISTAN

FORDWAH EASTERN SADIQIA (SOUTH)IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

JUNE 11, 1992

South Asia RegionCountry Department IIIAgriculture Operations Division

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance oftheir official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

CURRENCY EOUIVALENTS

US$1 - Rs 25.5Rs 1 - US$0.0392

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

Enelish/US Units Metric Units

1 inch (in) - 25.4 millimeters (mm)1 foot (ft) - 30.5 centimeters (cm)1 yard (yd) - 0.915 meters (m)1 mile (mi) - 1.609 kilometers (km)1 acre (ac) - 0.405 hectares (ha)1 square mile (sq mi) - 259 ha1 pound (lb) - 0.454 kilograms (kg)1 long ton (lg t) - 1.016 metric tons (t)1 cubic foot/second (cfs) - 0.0283 cubic meters/sec (m3/sec)I acre foot (ac/ft) - 1,233.5 cubic meters (m3)

FISCAL YEAR

July 1 - June 30

FOR OMCIL USE ONLYABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ADB - Asian Development BankADP - Annual Development Programcca - Canal Command AreaCIR - Country Implementation ReviewOWN? - Command Water Management ProjectEC - Electric Conductivity (of water or other solutions)ECNEC - Executive Committee of the National Economic CouncilFGW - Fresh GroundwaterGOP - Government of PakistanGOPunjab - Government of Punjab ProvinceICB - International Competitive BiddingrWASRI - International Waterlogging and Salinity Research InstltuteLCB - Local Competitive BiddingNAF - Million Acre FeetMinW&P - Ministry of Water and PowerM&E - Monitoring and Evaluationmmhos/cm - Millimhos per Centimeter (unit of electric conductivity)NRAP - Netherlands Research Assistance ProjectNDB - Non-Development BudgetOFWM - On-Farm Water ManagementO&M - Operation and MaintenancePID - Punjab Irrigation Departmentppm - Parts per MillionP&I - Planning and Investigation Organization, WAPDARAP - Revised Action Programme for Irrigated AgricultureRSC - Residual Sodium CarbonateSAR - Sodium Absorption RatioSCARP - Salinity Control and Reclamation ProjectSGW - Saline GroundwaterSOE - Statement of ExpenditureTA - Technical AssistanceTDS - Total Dissolved SolidsTW - TubevellUNDP - United Nations Development ProgramWAPDA - Water and Power Development AuthorityWMED - Watercourse Monitoring and Evaluation Directorate, WAPDAWUA - Water Users Associatior;W/C - Watercourse

GLOSSARY

chak - tertiary irrigation commandkharif - wet season (mid-April to mid-October)mogha - uncontrolled outlet from parent supply channel to chakrabi - dry season (mid-October to mid-April)sarkari khal - communal portion of watercoursetoba - natural depressionvarabundi - weekly rotational schedule of irrigation deliveries to

farmerswatercourse - irrigation distribution system within a chak

|This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performanceof their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank author4ation |

PAKISTAN

FORDWAH EASTERN SADIOIA (SOUTH)IRRIGATION AND PRAINGE POJECT

Table of Contents

Page No.

CREDIT AND PROJECT SUMMARY ................. i-iiiI. BACKGROUND ............................. 1

Introdue~tion ............................. 1Demographic and Physical Features ............... 1Agriculture and Its Performance ........................ 2Irrigated Agriculture and Water Management . . 2- Indus Irrigation System. 2- Irrigation Outside the Indus System . ................ 2- On-Farm Water Management . . 3Drainage Systems... 3- Groundwater Situation and Significance. 3- Surface Drains .. 3- Subsurface Drainage .. 4Government Policy and Bank Group Assistance Strategy 4Lessons Learned from IDA Assisted Projects. . 6Issues.. 7Rationale for Bank Group Involvement ................... 10

II. THE PRCJECT AREA ..................................... 11Climate ..................................... 11Physical Features ...................................... 11- Soils and Land Forms .11- Irrigation System and Water Supply ... 11- Drainage .12Waterlogging and Salinity .13Farm Size -nd Tenure .13Cropping Intensities and Yields .14Agricultural Inputs and Services .14- Inputs .14- Agricultural Support Services .15Marketing .15

This report is based on the findings of an appraisal mission which visitedPakistan in June/July 1991. Mission members included Messrs. P. Streng, J.Mohamadi, W. Ochs, U. Qamar (IDA), B. Bishay, C.P. Cheng and M. Haider(consultants). A follow-up mission, comprising Messrs. J. Nohamadi and N. Ahmadvisited Pakistan in October 1991. A second follow-up mission, comprising Messrs.N. Ahmad, Nadim Khouri and U. Qamar visited Pakistan in February 1992. Thereport was prepared by Messrs. M. Ahmad, U. Qamar and P. Streng. Peer reviewersand lead advisers were Messrs. G. Fauss, L. Noscoso and H. Plusquellec. Mr. Paulrsenman is the Country Director and Nr. Ridvan AlI the Agricultural OperationsDivision Chief of Country Department III, South Asia Region.

III. TI PRLOJECT, ....................................... 16Project Concept and Objectives ......................... 16Project DescrLption . 17A Interceptor Drains . . 17B Lining of Distrbutaries and rs Minors 17C Watercourse Improvemant ... 18

D Surf; *e Drainage System. . 18Surface Drains .. .. ... 18

• Drainage Effluent Disposal. . 19E Field Trials and Monitoring for Phase 2 ........ ..... 19F Irrigation and Drainage Research ................. ... 20G Monitoring and Evaluation ....... .................... 21H Technical Assistance and Training ................ ... 21I Future Project Preparation ....... ................... 22

IV. PRJECT COSTS. FINANCING AND PROCUREMET .............. . 22

Project Costs ........................... . ..... 22

Financing .............................................. 23Procurement ............................................ 23Disbursement ........................................... 25

Accounts and Audits .................................... 26

V. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION. NAINTENANCE,AND COST RECOVERY ...................................... 26Institutional Arrangements ............................. 26- Implementing Agencies ............................... 26- Project Coordination ................................ 29Monitoring and Evaluation .............................. 30Operationi, Maintenance and Cost Recovery ............ ... 31Implementation Schedule ................................ 32Mid-Term Review ........................................ 33

VI. PRODUCTION. MARKETING AND PRICES. FARM INCOME .......... 33Agricultural Impact .... ................................ 33- General ........................................ 33- Cropping Pattern and Intensity .............. . 34- Crop Yields and Production ............... . ... 34Marketing and Prices ............................ 35Farm Income ............................................ 35

VII. BENEFITS AND JUSTIFICATION ........ ..................... 36Production and Employment .............................. 36Other Benefits ......................................... 36Economic Analysis ............................... 36

Sensitivity and Risks ........................... 37Environmental Issues ................................... 38

VIII. AGREEMENTS REACHED AND Rg"OMMENDATIONS ............... .. 38

ANS

Annex 1 - Table 1: Physical Features- Tible 2: Channels with Interceptor Drains- Table 3: Channels to be Lined- Table 4: Contracts for Surface Drains- Table 5: Planned and Additional Drains- Table 6: Cost estimate of Surface Drains

Annex 2 - Subsurface Drainage Field Trial Details

Annex 3 - Monitoring of Land and Water Conditions

Annex 4 - Irrigation and Drainage Research

Annex 5 - List of Equipment

Annex 6 - Table 1: Project Cost - Components by year- Table 2: Project Cost - Summary Accounts by year- Table 3: Project Cost - Summary Accounts by Component- Table 4: Project Cost - Components by year inc. Contingencies (Rs)- Table 5: Project Cost - Components by year .3ac. Contingencies ($)

Annex 7 - Table 1: Estimated Disbursement Schedule

- Table 2: Disbursement Categories

Annex 8 - Project Implemenlation Schedule

Annex 9 - Table 1: Surface Water Availability- Table 2: Financial Budget - Total Project- Table 3: Financial Budgets of Small and Large Farm- Table 4: Financial and Economic Prices

Annex 10 - Economic Benefits and CostsAnnex 11 - IDA Supervision Plan

CHART

I - Project Organization and Coordination

NME

IBRD 23406IBRD 23407

- L -

EQRDYAN EASTERN SADIOIA (SOUTH)IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

STAFF APPRAISAL REPORT

CREDIT AND PROJECT SUMNARY

BoXXower : Islamic Republic of Pakistan

Beneficiaries : Punjab Irrigation and Agriculture Departments, andWater and Power Development Authority.

Amount IDA credit : SDR 39.6 million (US$54.20 millionequivalent)

T,erms : Standard with 35 years maturity

On-lending Terms : Not applicable

Descrgtion The proposed project is located in one of the leastdeveloped areas of Punjab province, about 300 km southof Lahore in the south-eastern corner of the Province.It is Government's first effort to controlwaterlogging and salinity through improved watermanagement. Beside removing severe water supplyconstraints by increasing delivery efficiency ofcanals and watercourses, it would control excessiveseepage, the major cause of waterlogging and salinityand provide surface drainage. The main objectives ofthe project are to: (i) increase agriculturalproductivity and income; (ii) reduce the need forexpensive subsurface drainage and avert relatedenvironmentally harmful effects; and (iii) improve theequity of water distribution. To achieve theseobjectives the project would: (a) conserve water by:(i) recovering a significant amount of seepage fromthe larger channels by installing interceptor drains;and (ii) preventing seepage from distributaries andminors by providing impervious lining and improvingvatercourses; (b) provide a network of surface drainsin the area to evacuate storm water run off; (e.) carryout research on technical and management issuescrucial for irrigation and drainage subsectors andtheir integration with agriculture; (d) providetechnical assistance to ensure adequate back-up forimplementing agencies and train project staff; and (e)monitor and evaluate the project's impact ongroundwater table and agricultural production. Theproject would be implemented over a six year period.

- il-

Benefits and Risks: Project benefits would include: (i) increase inagricultural production; (ii) reduction in the arearequiring subsurface drainage; (iii) improvement insurface drainage of the area; (iv) improvement in theeapabilities of implementing agenzies; (v)streng"aiening of farmer institutions and their role in?erat;ion and maintenance; (vi) enhancement of

'rinowledge on the impact of waterlogging and salinityotn crops, and on the benefits of different types of* :.nal lining; and (vii) development of a pilot demand-based irrigation system.

The Punjab Irrigation Department has little pastexperience of lining canals with geo-membrane. Thisfactor, c abined with the inherent weaknesses ofPakistan's construction industry could result inconstruction delays. To minimize this risk and toensure the quality of construction, contracts forlining would be awarded following internatioralcompetitive bidding procedures and techn: ealassistance would be provided to ensure properspecifications and construction supervision.Similarly, there is no past experience in Punjab inI.ntercepting seepage from canals with interceptordrains. In view of this, a gradual approach to theinstallation of interceptor drains would be adopted,whereby drains would be installesd along the smallerchannels based on the monitoring results from largerchannels. Finally, implementation delays could occurdue to shortage of local funding. The Government isminimizing this risk by preparing three year rollingplans to assess future funding requirements of ongoingas well as new projects. The current assessment isthat adequate funding would be available for theproject, as several on-going projects in Punjab arenearing completion.

Other Riske The Federal Shariat Court of Pakistan has recentlygiven a ruling that the Shariah does not permit thepayment or award of interest and thus, has instructedthe Government to modify a number of existing lawsthat currently provide for payment of interest. TheGovernment has filed an appeal vith the Supreme Courtagainst the Shariat Court ruling, which has beenstayed pending the outcome of the appeal. As far asPakistan's obligations under loan and creditagreements with Bank/IDA are concerned, these would bevalid and enforceable under international law, inaccordance with the terms of those agreements and thegeneral conditions of Bank/IDA, notwithstanding anylocal law or judicial decision regarding the paymentof interest and other charges, including any suchruling.

- lil -

Estimated Proiget Cost:

(USS Million)Local Foreign Total

Interceptor Drains 15.83 6.15 21.98

Canal Lining 13.92 4.60 18.52

On Farm Water Management 0.70 0.10 0.80

Surface Drains 5.87 1.18 7.05

Phase 2 & Monitoring 2.31 0.94 3.25

Irrig./Drainage Research 4.07 0.58 4.66

Monitoring & Evaluation 0.31 0.00 0.31

Technical Assist. & Trng. 0.55 0.23 0.78

Future Proj. Preparation 0.57 0.43 1.00

Total Base Cost 44.13 ±4.21 58.34

Physical Contingencies 3.03 1.01 4.04

Price Contingencies 6.27 2.00 8.27

Total Project Cost 53.44 17.22 70.65 a/

a/ Includes US$ 7.6 m taxes and duties.

Financing Plan:

Local Foreign Total(USS Million)

Government 16.4 -- 16.4

IDA 37.0 17.2 54.2

Total 53.4 17.2 70.6

Estimated Disbursements:IDA Fiscal Year

93 94 95 96 97 (US$ Million)

Annual 1.5 5.7 9.4 10.5 10.6 10.9 5.6

Cumulative 1.5 7.2 16.6 27.1 37.7 48.6 54.2

Rate of Return 22X

PAKISTAN

90RWAH EASTERN SADIQIA (SOUTH)IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

I. BACKGrOUND

Introduct_4io

1.1 Much of the advance made in Pakistan's farm production since the mid-1960s is due to the development of irrigated crop technology. However, yields inirrigated agriculture are low by world standards, due in part to poor management.One of the most constraining factors is inadequate and untimely supply ofirrigation water to the farm. In mar.y areas, uncontrolled seepage to thegroundwater from canals and watercourses for more than a century has resulted inhigh water tables. Continuous capillary rise and subsequent high rates ofevaporation move salts from the groundwater to the surface layers of the soilresulting iti soil degradation. These problems have become so severe in manyareas that they cannot be overcome by the farmers alone. They require publicinvestments to increase the delivery efficiency of the irrigation canals, therebyreducing excessive seepage to the groundwater, end to enlarge canal capacities toprovide adequate water for irrigation and leaching, and construction of drainagesystems for the control and disposal of harmful groundwater salts.

1.2 Due to growing concern about the problem of waterlogging andsalinity, the Government of Pakistan (GOP) requested IDA assistance in financinganother subsurface saline drainage project in Punjab Province. Preparation ofthe feasibility report' was funded under Salinity Control and ReclamationProject-VI (SCARP VI, Cr. 754-PAK), and an appraisal mission visited Pakistanduring June/July 1991. Due to data limitations, the mission found it difficulito clearly define the area to be provided with subsurface drains, and thereforeto come up with a reliable cost estimate for this key component. The missionalso felt that water conservation measures woul. reduce subsurface drainage needsand lead to a more cost-effective subsurface drainage design. Instead of theproject proposed in the feasibility report, the mission proposed a two-phasedapproach: a Phase 1 project, including water conservation measures, a researchprogram, and additional preparation work for subsurface drainage to beimplemented under a separate, future Phase 2 project. Preparation of Phase 1 wasto be funded under SCARP VI. The Phase 1 project is the subject of this staffappraisal report.

DemograDhic and Physical Features

1.3 Pakistan's populat 7.) is now over 110 million; growing at an annualrate of over 3%, it is estimat-> to reach 151 million2 by the year 2000. Over70% of the population lives !.i rural areas. Average annual per capita income isabout US$375 equivalent, but 30% of the population is estimated to have annualincome below the absolute poverty level (US$150).

l/ Fordwah Eastern Sadigia (South) Sub-Surface Drainage Project.Feasibility Report, National Engineering Services Pakistan (NESPAK)and HARZA Engineering Co. International, January 1991.

2/ Rapid Population Growth in Pakistan, World Bank, 1989.

-2-

1.4 Pakistan covers an area of about 80 million ha of mainly ariu andsemi-arid land. Approximately 20 million ha are cultivated (16.5 million hairrigated), 3.0 million ha exploitable forest, and 8.0 million ha xangelands.Much of the Indus plain, the main agricultural producing region, receives lessthan 150 mm of rainfall annually whereas pan evaporation is more than 1,250 mm,which makes irrigation a virtual necessity.

Agriculture and Its Performance

1.5 Agriculture is the most important sector in the ec>....my in terms ofcontribution to gross domestic product (26%), foreign exchange earnings (70% oftotal, including 50% cotton based manufactures), and employment generation (54%of the labor force). Over 90% of total farm output comes from irri8gted land.Major crops are wheat, cotton, rice, and sugarcane. During the Sixth Five-YearPlan (FY84-88), qgricultural production grew at 3.8% annuall- against a target of4.9%. Major crops are estimated to have grown by 3.1% dt £Y90, whereas minorcrops achieved their highest growth rate for the last five 7ur' (4%).Inadequate and untimely supply of irrigation water coupled wit.; waterlogging andsalinity continue to be among the most serious technical constraints limitingcrop production. Even with the recent significant increares in production,average yields of major field crops remain well below those of other developingcountries.

Irrniated Agriculture and Water Management

1.6 Indus Irrigation System. The Indus system commands about 14.2million ha and comprises the Indus river and its major tributaries, three majorreservoirs (Tarbala, Mangla, and Chashma)3, 19 barrages or headworks, 12 lirkcanals, 43 canal commands and over 100,000 chaks.4 The length of the canals isabout 58,000 km, with communal watercourses (W/C), farm channels and fieldditches running another 1.6 M km. Irrigation was practiced in the area as earlyas 1,000 BC; however, the first controlled year-round i.irgP-ion began in 1859with the completion of the Upper BarL Doab Canal from the 1., Jaopur headworks onthe Ravi river. Following the 1960 Indus Water Treaty with India, huge linkcanals were constructed to supplement inadequate flows of the eastern rivers(Ravi and Sutlej).

1.7 In the Indus system, river water (about 130 billion m3) is divertedby barrages and weirs into main ccnals and subsequently into branch canals,distributaries and minors. Open, tree-flowing outlets (moghas) regulate waterflow from distributaries and minors to W/Cs. With reservoir storage and pumpageby about 11,000 public and over 225,000 pr.vate tubewells from fresh groundwater(FGW) aquifers (about 43 b41lion m3), cropping intensity is now about 110%. Theoverall irrigation distriLt t.on efficiency is estimated to be below 40%, withmaximum losses occurring in the chaks. Operation and maintenance (O&M) of thedistribution system above the mogha is the responsibility of the rrovincialIrrigation Departments, and farmers are responsible for O&M of W/Cs and fieldchannels.

1.8 Irrigation Outside the Indus System. About 2.2 million ha ofirrigated land is located outside the Indus canal command area (cca), scatteredin relatively small parcels with water coming from open wells, tubewells, lift

3/ About 18 billion m3 of live storage.

4/ Tertiary irrigation command.

-3-

pumps, karezes 5 , springs, and small diversions. Generally, water supply inthese systems is uncertain and varies with season and location. Normallv, thesesystems do not suffer from waterlogging and salinity; however, O&M costs ater.latively high, resulting in poor and inefficient 0&M.

1.9 On-Pam Water Mana._ement. In each canal command, land is dividedinto watercourse command areas -- chaks. Each chak is a complex miniatureIrrigation system with an average length of channels of 16 km. Waterdistribution to the field is governed by a weekly tirs rotation (warabundi) basedon the size of land holding. Planned water duty was originally about 0.085 m3

per second for each 400 ha, which permitted a cropping Lntensity of about 80%. Aseries of "SAID financed experiments and investigations conducted in the 1970 atWAPDA's Mona Reclamation Experiment Station (MRES) showed that water losses inthe communal W/Cs were between 30% and 50% with additietil losses in the farmerbranches and field ditches. Technological improvement centered on partial bricklining of W/Cs, design and maintenance of earthen sections, design of permanentoutlets, and specifications for land levelling.

Drainage Systems

1.10 Groundwater Situation and Sianificance. The hydrological talance ofthe Indus plain has been significantly altered during the past century byexpanded diversion of river flows for irrigation. Seepage from the canal systemand W/Cs, and deep percolation of irrigation water from irrigated land haveresulted in a gradual rise of the groundwater table. At the beginning of thiscentury, the water table was generally below 15-20 m and therefore subsurfacedrains were not provided because it would have been uneconomic to do so.However, the Indus Basin Salinitv Survey8 reports that 22% of the Indusirrigation system has a water table within 1.8 m and another 30% within 3 m ofthe surface. TMm waterlogging is increasing and estimates are that currentlyover 40% of the area has water table within 3.0 m of the surface7. Divertingwater to land brings with it salts which concentrate in the upper soil layerswhen inadequate water is applied to leach them out and/or by capillary actionwhen the water table is less than 1.5 m from the surface. This concentration ofsalts makes soils problematic, and along with free water table in the root zonereduces crop yields. Hence, a major threat to increasing crop production iswaterlogging and salinity.

1.11 Surface Drains. Numerous studies and investigations in Pakistan inthe 1930s reported that waterlogging was caused by inadequate surface drains anddifferences in the permeability of soil sub-strata. Her.;*, it was reasoned thatthe rising groundwater table was caused mainly by monsoon rainfall. If thiswould have been so, a high water table would have prevailed throughout the IndusPlain before the introduction of irrigation, which was not the case. Since themajor contributor to waterlogging is deep percolation of diverted irrigationwater, surface drains have had only marginal effect in slowing the rise of thegroundwater table. This is not to minimize their value because they do provide:(i) relief from rain flooding; (ii) an outlet for subsurface drainage effluent;(iii) reduction of seepage of rainfall to the groundwater; and (iv) limitedremoval of subsurface water.

5/ Traditional irrigation system with tunnel channel.

6/ Indus Basin Salinity Survey, VAPDA, 1981.

7 Seventh Five Year Plan Proposals (1988-1993), 1987, 'Report ofTechnical Committee on Drainage and Reclamation'.

-4-

1.12 In 1973 and 1976, and again in 1988, floods from heavy monsoon rainsresulted in masslve property damage and loss of nearly 1,000 lives. To reducesuch damage, GOP and the Provinces have installed about 15,000 km of surfacedrains and over 8,250 km of flood protection bunds. In an effort to strengthenthe surface drainage and flood protection network, the Asian Development Bank(ADB) financed the preparation of a National Flood Plan and is assisting infinancing envisaged works. As part of this program there is need to extend thesurface drainage system to provide appropriate outlets to chaks.

1.13 Subsurface Drainaue. Responsibility for addressing the problem ofwaterlogging and salinity was assigned to WAPDA in 1958. Based on variousstudies, WAPDA initiated a nationwide program of salinity control and reclamationprojects (SCARPs) under which public tubewella were installed to: (i) controlwaterlogging and salinity; and (ii) develop fresh groundwater (FGW)8 resourcesfor agricultural production. Installation of these large turbine tubevells (2-5cusee capacity) and related surface drains has been funded under the FederalAnnual Development Program (ADP), whereas the Provincial Irrigation Departmentshave been responsible for O&M, funded under the Provincial Non-DevelopmentBudgets (NDB). VAPDA has ir.stalled about 12,500 tubewells, of which about 11,000in FGW and the rest in SGW zones. When completed, the SCARPs (mostly locallyfunded) are to cover about 6.25 million ha. Even though over Rs 6,000 millionhave been invested in the program, only about 35X of this target has beenachieved so far. The SCARPs raised farmers' interest in groundrater development,which resulted in installation of over 250.000 small private suction-lift pumps(one cusec capacity or less). These private tubewells have contributedsubstantially to the control of waterlogging and salinity, but raised somegovernment officials' concern about over-exploitation of the groundwaterresources in highly developad areas. It is estimated that annual pumpage ofprivate tubewells is over 37 billion m3, and that of public tubewells about 6billion m3.

1.14 SCARP tubevells have contributed to aaeliorating waterlogging andsalinity in localized areas; however, the problem continues to grow even in theSCARP areas. WAPDA reported that about 25% of the SCARP command area has awatertable within 1.6 m of the surface. This continuing high water table hasresulted from a multitude of problems, i.e., technical, institutional, financial,and economic.9 Pumping capacity of individual SCARPs declines by about 4.5%annually because of blockage of screens and gravel packs, and poor pumpmaintenance. The cost (Rs 1416 million in FY92) of operating tubewells in PunjabProvince absorbs more than 50% of available O&M funding even though tubewells areoperated on a very limited basis.

Government Poliec and Bank Group Assistance Strateov

1.15 Government Policy. The Revised Action Programme for IrrigatedAgriculture (RAP), resulting from the UNDP financed, WAPDA implemented IndusPlanning Study (PAK/74/044), for which the Bank was executing agency, wascompleted in May 1979. A major recommendation of RAP was provision of"controlled" and/or "guaranteed" water supplics. To the extent possible,irrigation supplies should be made available to match crop water needs in

6/ FGW in Pakistan is generally defined as having total dissolvedsolids (TDS) of less than 1,000 parts per million (ppm), and salinegroundwater (SGW) as having more than 1,000 ppm.

9/ Revised Action Protramme for Irrigated Agriculture, WAPDA MasterPlanning and Review Division, May 1979.

quantity and time. The recommended policies, programs and project modes toachieve this objective were:

(i) FGW resoutces should be developed and exploited by the privatesector, with public sector assistance in the form of supervisedcredit, and technology and information supply;

(ui) a program should be implemented for transferring public FGW tubewellsto the private sector (SCARP Transition);

(iii) a V/C lining program should be executed by the public sector;

(iv) control of waterlogging and salinity in SGW areas should have highpriority in the goverrment's investment program; and

(v) a basin and canal command water management program should beintroduced.

The above recommendations, along with other RAP proposals, i.e., elimination oftubevell and fertilizer stbsidies, investment priority for water management,systems rehabilitation, ari programs to improve delivery of non-water inputs andservices, have been adoptet policy of GOP in its Fifth, Sixth and Seventh (FY89-93) Five-Year Plans. GOP fully recognizes that the huge investment made inirrigation and drainage would be largely wasted if the facilities are notmaintained, efficiency of water delivery and use is not improved, and furtherdrainage is not provided to check waterlogging and salinity.

1.16 The Water Sector Investment Planning Study (WSIPS, December 1990),also UNDP financed with the Bank as executing agency, recommends to undertake aprogram of studies, research and pilot projects which would lead to theformulation and implementation of a long-term strategy of IntegratedComprehensive Management of the Indus Basin. The short-term strategy proposed byWSIPS is:

(i) Improved operation of the existing irrigation systems.

(ii) Equitable water distribution to farm outlets (moghas).

(iiL) Watercourse lining.

(iv) Conjunctive use of Mangla and Tarbela reservoirs.

(v) Cost recovery.

(vi) Project preparation for pending schemes.

(vii) Investigations, research and pilot programs.

1.17 With the settlement of the water allocation dispute between theprovinces, a dominant constraint to efficient utilization of available vater hasbeen removed, providing opportunities for a comprehensive approach to irrigationdevelopment. In the absence of this agreement, development efforts were usuallylimited to improving a single aspect or section of an irrigation system.Investment projects and modes of operation that might alter the water allocationsvere out of consideration. The current environment allows optimal use of waterresources vithin each province, making it possible to adopt improved operationalpolicies along with the development efforts.

6-

1.18 Bank Group Assistance Strategv in agriculture is directed primarilyat improving productivity in the sector, with particular emphasis on supportingdevelopment and improved management of Pakistan's Indus river irrigation system.The Bank's involvement in the water sector dates back to the successfulsettlement of the apportionment of the Indus water between Pakistan and India.Bank's financial assistance as well as polLcy advLce has contributed toattainment of self-sufficiency and export generation in the past decade. Up tothe mid-1970s, the Bank assisted with the construction of large dams and linkcanals to develop additional water supplies. The Bank also assisted GOP with itsSCARP program. In 1980s increasing attention was devoted to irrigation systemsrehabliltation along with controlling the problems of waterlogging and salinity.The Bank's dialogue with the Government focussed on the long term sustainabilityof the lrrigation system and a new approach to cost recovery was instituted withthe Government's endorsement. It involved provision of adequats fundin, for O&M,cost recovery and privatization of public tubewells in the fresh groundwaterareas. These policies have been instrumental in the growth of agriculturalproduction.

1.19 The Bank Group's operations include:

(i) SCARPs and drainage projects, to control waterlogging and salinity(Khairpur Tubewell Drainage Project [Cr. 22-PAK], Khairpur TileDrainage and Irrigated Farming Development Project (Cr. 684-PAK],SCARP VI [Cr. 754-PAK], SCARP Mardan (Cr.877-PAR], Fourth DrainageProject (Gr. 1375-PAR], Left Bank Outfall Drain Project tLBOD, Cr.1532-PAK]. SCARP Transition Pilot Project (Cr. 1693-PAK]) and theSecond SCARP Transition Project (Cr. 2257-PAR);

(ii) projects to improve and rehabilitate the deteriorated irrigationeystem (Irrigation Systems Rehabilitation Project [Cr. 1239-PAR] andSecond Irrigation Systems Rehabilitation Project [ISRP-II, Cr. 1888-PAR], Command Water Management Project [CWMP, Cr. 1487-PAR];

(iii) projects to improve water use in watercourse commands and on farms(On-Farm Water Management Project [Cr. 1163-PAK], Second On-FarmWater Management Project (Cr. 1603-PAR]), and the Third On-Farm WaterManagement Project (OFWM-III, Cr. 2245-PAK and Ln. 3327-PAR); and

(iv) a number of area development, flood damage restoration, agriculturalextensLon and research, agricultural credit, and seeds projects.

1.20 While the above policies and operations have played crucial role instimulating agricultural growth, it is now recognized that further improvementsin productivity would primarily depend upon better match±ug trrigation supplieswith crop demand and increasing involvement of farmers in decision making andoperation and maintenance. Accordingly, the Bank's strategy now emphasizes: (i)a demand-based approach to irrigation management to achieve equitable and timelywater deliveries and efficient use of water; (ii) preventive measures to controldegradation of the resource base due to waterlogging and salinity; (iil)integration of institutions involved in irrigation and agriculture; and (iv)building farmer institutions.

Lesson. Learned from IDA Assisted Prolects

1.21 The projects which IDA helped finance in the sector have experienceda variety of implementation problems, i.e., slow GOP approval process, inadequateprocurement procedures, unavailability of final designs for construction, and

inexperienced and inadequately capitalized contractors. This has delayedimplementation -- for example, SCARP VI and SCARP Mardan are now being completedafter an implementation period of more than ten years. While some of the factorsthat had caused serious delays in ongoing projects -- delay in preparation of PC-110 documents, and lack of engineering designs -- are now being addressedthrough assistance by appraisal teams as necessary (PC-1 preparation) andstricter Government/Bank requirements (availability of designs), the problem ofinexperienced, under-capitalized civil works contractors remains. This problembecame particularly acute in the Fourth Drainage Project: the subsurfacedrainage contractor abandoned the site in May 1990, and it took until April 1991to reach an understanding on the resumption of work and completion of remainingitems (now expected by 1993).

1.22 On the contrary, progress in CWMP and ISRP-II (specially in Punjab)is quite satisfactory. Both of these projects have large canal remodelling andlining components. Similarly, the completion of the first two On-Farm WaterManagement Projects was timely, and the projects' physical targets were achieved.In most of these investments, the structural measures remained the major focus ofGOP, and water management, integrated use of rivers, conjunctive use of ground-and surface water, and advanced crop planning received limited attention. Fromthis experience the following lessons have been learned:

(i) there is a need to tighten prequalification and bidding procedures toensure awards are made to competent and well-financed contractors;

(ii) current institutional capability to implement irrigation projects isbetter than drainage projects;

(iii) subsurface drainage technology, both horizontal (tile) and vertical(tubewell), employed as designed, is effective in ameliorating thedebilitating problems of waterlogging and salinity;

(iv) adequate O&M funding and trained manpower must be provided to ensuresustainability of benefits;

(v) coordinated supply of non-water inputs and services is required tomeet the objective of increased agricultural production; and

(vi) further emphasis is needed on the water management policies basinwide, and at the provincial and canal command levels.

Issues

1:23 There are three significant issues relating to the proposed projectthat need to be appropriately resolved. They are: selection of experienced andwell-capitalized contractors; strengthening of O&M funding and cost recoveryprograms; and a vulti-dimensional approach to ensure efficient increases inagricultural production.

1.24 Selection of Experienced and Well-Capitalized Civil WorksContractors. The IDA assisted SCARP VI, SCARP Mardan, and Fourth Drainageprojects have been plagued by implementation problems directly associated withinefficient operation and management of selected contractors. The firms selected

10/ PC-1 stands for Planning Commission Proforma number 1. It is a proformaon which salient features of development project are submitted for GOPs approval.

had little, if any, prior field experience in remodelling and lining large canalsor installing tubeweli.s or horizontal pipe drains as required under the contract.This inexperience was compounded by low bids, which made it almost impossible forthe contractor to install the works without losing money. Steps must be taken toensure that only experienced and well-capitalized contractors are prequalifiedand selected. Prospective contractors must be thoroughly evaluated to ensuretheir ability to fulfil' contract provisions. Awarding of contracts to firms ofquestionable capability discourages bona fide bids as potential bidders know thatpast awards have gone to such firms at unprofitable prices. Arrangements must bemade by GOP to ensure: (i) broad dissemination of information on the nature ofcivil works to be carried out and the required qualifications of contractors;(ii) careful evaluation of prequalification applications and bids; and (iii)inspection of potential contractors to verify their technical (personnel andequipment) and financial capabilities.

1.25 Operation and Maintenance (OEM) Funding. The operation andmaintenance of reservoirs and inter-river link canals is managed by the Water andPower Development Authority (WAPDA, on behalf of the federal government). TheO&M of the irrigation canal systems down to the watercourse outlets (mogha) isthe responsibility of the Provincial Irrigation Departments (PIDs). Beyond themogha, farmers maintain the watercourses and farm channels. The maintenance ofSCARP tubevel's and tile drainage pumps is also the responsibility of PIDs.Funding for O&M of the irrigation system including the SCARP tubewells isallocated to PIDs by the Provincial Finance Departments through the Non-Development Budget (NDB). Normally O&M funding in the NDB should be met byfinancial resources generated within the Province. However, O&M funding has beenadversely affected by the current public financial constraints, notwithstandingsupplemental grants by GOP to provincial NDBs. Furthermore to alleviate thefunding problem, GOP has assumed the responsibility for rehabilitation of floodprotection works and included it in the Federal Annual Development Program (ADP).

1.26 During the 1970s a major portion of the O&M budget was absorbed bythe O&M cost of SCARP tubewells, resulting in shortfalls in the O&M needs forcanals, surface drains and flood protection works. To overcome this problem, GOPand GOProvinces accepted the recommendation of Revised Action Programme forIrrigated Agriculture and initiated a transition program to transfer tubewells inthe FGW zones to the private sector for operation, maintenance, and replacement.To catch up with deferred maintenance, GOP and GOProvinces, with assistance fromthe Bank and other donors (such as USAID), embarked on a program to rehabilitatethe irrigation system. The IDA-financed Irrigation System Rehabilitation Project(ISRP-I, Cr 1239-PAK), a three-year time slice of the rehabilitation program, wasinitiated in 1983 in all four provinces. Under ISRP-I and the Command WaterManagement Project (CWMP), GOP and GOProvinces agreed to increase O&M funding forirrigation and drainage facilities and to furnish annual updates of O&M fundingproposals to IDA for review and comment. During FY83 through FY87 the fundinglevels were increased by about 15% annually, and they generally met or exceededthe agreed O&M targets established under ISRP-I.

1.27 During the appraisal of ISRP-II, the FY88 O&M funding levels wereconsidered adequate, and thus emphasis was placed on two areas: (a) improving thecapability and efficiency of PIDs in carrying out O&M activities; and (b)maintaining in real terms the level of O&M funding, using the FY88 funding levelsas benchmarks for the existing facilities with appropriate increases to cover anynew facilities. It is premature to make an evaluation of the extent to which thefirst objective is being met, as the ISRP-II is still ongoing. However, actualO&M funding allocations have fallen short of targets in all Provinces except NWFPsince FY88. As already stated, the current financial constraints facing GOP and

- 9 -

the Provinces have been a major factor contributing to this problem. In Jaruary1992, however, there have been two positive developments. First, GOPunjabenhanced its O&M budget by a significant amount (Rs 75 million, about a 7%Increase in the annual allocation); and second, a program for desilting canals inunjab was undertuken with voluntary labor contributed by farmers (estimated costRs 40 million). These two measures have reduced the gap between the totalallocation and the agreed O&M funding target in Punjab. While the otherprovinces have yet to take steps to enhance O&M budgets, assurances were providedduring the March 1992 country implementation review (CIR) between the Bank, GOPand GOProvinces that O&M allocations would be enhanced to the agreed targets.

1.28 The annual review and discussion process adopted during the 1980s wasinstrumental in highlighting the importance of O&M allocations and ensuringadequate allocations in the annual NDBs. During the CIR, and in subsequentdiscussions, GOP and GOProvinces have expressed the need for reviewing the O&Mallocation targets. In this regard discussions with the government have alreadybegun with the objective of introducing an annual review process in which theBank and the government would reach agreement on the O&M allocations for thefollowing fiscal ,Year.

1.29 Cost Recovery. In order to provide adequate funds for propermaintenance of the system, it is the Government's objective to recover, as aminimum, the entire O&M expenditures through water charges. In Punjab and NWFP,water charges are assessed by PIDs, and in Sindh and Balochistan by the RevenueDepartment. In all provinces the collection is done by the Revenue Departments.Water charges are based on crop acreage and the type of crop (indirectly relatingto water use).

1.30 A major reason for the inadequacy of O&M funds is the low level ofwater charges. During the mid-seventies water charges supplied revenuestotalling about 70% of total O&M expenditures, even though these expenditureswere quite low. However, O&M expenditures increased rapidly due to the increasein cost of operating tubewells. Over this period, GOP and IDA have held acontinuous dialogue on the subject of water charges and, under several IDA-assisted projects, the provinces were required to increase water charges.Through FY79-82, all provinces increased water charges by about 95%. Sindh andBalochistan further increased water cha..ges in FY83, and Sindh introduced a newdrainage cess in FY84. However, the provir..es have not significantly increasedwater charges since FY84, following the introduction of Ushr, an Islamic levyused by local authorities to benefit the needy. Ushr levy is assessed onagricultural production, and government considered that revenue from this levyqualifies as a substitution for water charges.

1.31 The appraisal of ISRP-II identified several sub-issues contributingto the widening gap between O&M allocations and actual water charges collected.These included rapidly increasing O&M costs with no concurrent increase in watercharge, and poorly administered water charge assessment and collection programs.GOP and GOProvinces agreed to arrangements leading to eventual elimination of O&Msubsidies through: (i) increasing revenue by improving water charge assessmentand collection procedures; (ii) reducing O&M requirements by privatizing publictubewells in FGW areas (SCARP Transition); and (iii) water charge adjustments tofill the gaps between the improved collections and required O&M allocations.These water charge adjustments were to commence after July 1, 1992, and fullcollection of O&M expenditures was expected by July 1, 1997. Measures to improverevenue collection are in the early stages of implementation and expected resultsare slow to appear. Nevertheless, in FY91 O&M revenue collected in Punjabincreased by more than 30%. There has also been some progress on privatizing

- 10 -

tubevells. No significant water charge increases have been implemented since theagreement. During the recent CIR, GOProvinces reiterated their commitment toincrease water charges in line with agreed covenants, and by July 1992, todevelop plans to reach full O&M cost recovery. To this end, GOP and GOProvinceswould adopt a transparent and annually monitorable plan to achieve full recoveryby end FY98. Discussions are already underway between the Bank, GOP andGOProvinces to work out an agreement in this regard.

1.32 Multi-Dimensional Approach to Ensure Increased AgriculturalProduction. GOP recognizes the necessity of a multi-dimensional approach forachieving efficient increases in agricultural production. Currently, there aremany nation- and province-wide agricultural projects being implemented, and theproposed project would combine features of these projects (systems improvement,on-farm water management, agricultural extension and research). In addition, GOPplans to make arrangements in the project area to ensure that all essentialagricultural components will be available to beneficiaries. Appropriatearrangements for providing such components would be necessary for realizing thefull benefits of the project investment. The proposed project's coordinationarrangements would help ensure this.

Rationale for Bank Involvement

1.33 This project would bring together major technical and policyrecommendations of the Revised Action Program and Water Sector InvestmentPlanning Study. Even more importantly, following the agreement on theapportionment of Indus waters among the Provinces, it provides for the first timethe opportunity to adopt an integrated approach to irrigation development. Itwill also introduce a new and cost effective approach to control waterlogging andsalinity through water conservation measures that are now feasible following thevater apportionment agreement. Furthermore, the project's research componentwould provide answers to a number of questions critical for the futuredevelopment of the Indus Basin irrigation system as intended in the provincialwater apportionment agreement. Through its policy dialogue with the Governmentand technical deliberations with the implementing agencies, the Bank Group iswell placed to assist in addressing policy, institutional, and technical issuesrelating to integrated irrigated agriculture management and development of a"demand based" irrigation system. The Bank's involvement would also play acatalytic role in:

(i) making irrigated agriculture possible at lower cost by reducing theneed for subsurface drainage;

(ii) mobilizing resources for financing complex and costly futureprojects;

(iii) ensuring full consideration and appropriate mitigation of adverseenvironmental effects of drainage projects;

(iv) assuring continuation of the Bank's leadership among donors in thefield of irrigation and drainage, which is particularly important atthis time when many new avenues of policy and operational initiativesare opening;

(v) improving coordination between agriculture and irrigation activitiesand respective instttutions; and

(vi) building farmer institutions and providing them a formal role in O&N.

- 11 -

II. THE PROJECT AREA

2.1 The proposed project is located about 300 km south of Lahore in thesouth-eastern corner of Punjab Province. It covers parts of the tehsils ofBahawalnagar, Haroonabad, and Chishtian in the Bahawalnagar District. The areais bordered on the northwest by the Malik Branch Canal, on the south by landsserved by the 6-R distributary of the Hakra Branch, and on the east by India (seeMap IBRD 23407). Gross area is about 121,000 ha and command area (cca) about105,000 ha (Annex 1, Table 1). There are approximately 242,000 inhabitants,living in a rural setting with many villages, several small, but no major towns.

Climate

2.2 The area has arid climate except during the July-September monsoonseason. Average annual rainfall is about 225 mm. With pan evaporation in excessof 2,000 mm, irrigation is essential for agriculture. The hottest month is Junewith average maximum temperature of 460C. January is the coolest month withaverage maximum temperature of 240C and minimum of 0°C. The project area is inthe Punjab Cotton Wheat agro-climatic zone where conditions permit year-roundcultivation.

Physical Features

2.3 Soils and Land Forms. The project area was claimed from theCholistan desert in the 1930s when surface irrigation water was first deliveredto that part of Punjab. The topsoil is generally medium textured and underlaidby several hundred meters of sand and silt deposited by the Ganges river prior tothe diversion of its flow to the Bay of Bengal. The topography is largely flatwith no natural drainage. Outcropping sand dunes occupy about 6% of the area.Almost 70X of the area is made up of terrace remnants. The most importantfeature of these soils is the occurrence of compact and calcareous silty/clayeynon-continuous layers at varying depths, which restrict the downward flow ofwater and act as barriers to vertical drainage. This condition appears to beless prevalent in the southern portion of the project area. The rest of thesoils are mostly subrecent levees; although low in organic matter and availablephosphorus they, along with the terrace remnants, are suitable for irrigatedagriculture.

2.4 Irrigation System and Water Supply. The project area is served bythe Hakra and Malik branch canals, which are supplied by the Eastern Sadiqiacanal having its offtake at the Suleimanki headworks on the Sutlej river(completed in 1933). The original designed water duty was for 0.085 cumec per400 ha (3 cusecs per 1000 acres), which would permit a cropping intensity ofabout 80X (40% each season). The quality of the surface water is good (about 300micromhos). Following the 1960 Indus Water Treaty with India, the area receivesits water supply through the Balloki-Suleimanki link, which brings it under thecommand of Mangla reservoir. Most of the channels are unlined and due to thepervious nature of the soils leak large quantities of water. This seepage is oneof the main reasons for waterlogging and salinization of soils in the projectarea.

2.5 Water supply has increased significantly since the commissioning ofthe Mangla dam and improvement of diversion structures (barrages), but the canalcapacity has not been increased. For this reason, canals are being operatedwithout freeboard. Because of the increased water supply but more significantlysubirrigation from the shallow water tables, the cropping intensity is now about130X. High evaporation from saline groundwater brings large quantities of salts

- 12 -

to the soil, affecting crop yields adversely. Surface water supply is shortduring the periods of peak crop water requirement (March, April, August,September and October). and in surplus during the rest of the year. According tothe Baseline Survey carried out in 1989.11 total supply to the project area isabout 1.16 MAF (for monthly supplies see Annex 9, Table 1). Water distributionamong distributaries and minors is inequitable. Similarly, flows to thewatercourses are also unequal with some drawing more than the design quantity andsome less Furthermore, distribution within the watercourse command varies.Inequity in distribution results in inefficient use of surface water and higherseepsge to the groundwater.

2.6 The profiect area is underlain by the sediment deposited by Sutlej-Hakra river system. The quality of groundwater in the area is highly saline.Because of poor aquifer conditions and marginal-to-poor quality groundwater(generally above 1,250 micromhos), only limited groundwater development has takenplace. However, due to continuous seepage from the irrigation system a zone offresh groundwater has been formed along the canals. During the last six yearsabout 400 small private tubewells (one cusec or less) have been installed toprovide supplemental ir-igation water only during periods of peak crop waterrequirements. Therefore, utilization of these wells is very low. Thesetubewells are mostly located close to irrigation channels because groundwaterquality around these channels is relatively better due to excessive seepage.Depending upon their location and depth, the water quality of these tubewellsvaries from fresh to brackish. Major constraints for the development of thefresh groundwater are its limited areal extent and contact with highly salinegroundwater. Preliminary surveys indicate that large scale groundwaterdevelopment in the area is not possible.

2.7 Drainage. There is no natural drainage system; roads and irrigationsystem have blocked most of the overland runoff. The project area was includedas SCARP VIII in the regional development program for the Northern Indus Plainsprepared by Timpton and Kalmbach, Inc. (consultants to WAPDA) in 1967. It wasredefined in 1978 by NESPAK, covering a total of 676,353 ha (1.67 million acres)on the left side of the Sutlej river in the Fordwah and Sadiqia canal commands.Out of this total, a pilot project of 31,509 ha (77,800 acres), known asMinchinabad Pilot Project, was implemented in the 1970s. In 1987, WAPDA furtherredefined the project area, excluding areas underlain by fresh groundwater andthe area covered by CWMP (Cr. 1487-PAK). This project, named Fordwah EasternSadiqia Remaining Phase-I (SCARP VIII), covered about 250,500 ha (618,580 acres).The most recent version of this project consists of two parts, the Northern andthe Southern Zone. An independent network of surface drains has been planned foreach zone. The surface drains in the North zone are to discharge into the Sutlejriver below the Islam Headworks. The surface drains in the South zone are todischarge into a series of evaporation ponds situated at the end of the naturalslope in the southwest of the project area in the Cholistan desert. The sameevaporation ponds would be used to dispose of subsurface drainage effluent fromthe 6-R subproject of CWMP. Due to shortage of funds, work on surface drains hasnot progressed well. All of the planned surface drains in the South zone fall iathe area of the proposed Fordwah Eastern Sadiqia (South) Project, Phase 1.

2.8 The area does not have arty subsurface drainage, except the privatetubewells mentioned in para 2.6 and some public tubewells installed by WAPDA.

1I/ Agro-Economic Evaluation, Baseline Survey, Fordwah Eastern SadiqiaProject Phase-I & II SCARP VIII, Watercourse Monitoring & Evaluation Directorate,Planning and Investigation Organization, WAPDA, October 1989.

- 13 -

The performance of the public tubewells has been marginal, mainly because of thepoor aquifer conditions and low number of operating hours. Because of the smallquantity of water pumped, the tubewells have provided only limited relief fromwaterlogging and salinity.

Waterlogging and Salinity

2.9 About 50% of the project area is considered waterlogged by GOP (seeTable 2.1) with a permanent water table within 1.5 m (5 feet) of the surface. Itis estimated that more than 45% of the delivered surface water percolates to thegroundwater. Waterlogging first appeared on lands in the upper reaches of theHakra Branch and is gradually moving down channel with an additional 6,000 haaffected each year. Currently, 11% of the area has a groundwater table of lessthan 0.76 m (2.5 feet), 17% of 0.76-1.22 m, and 21% of 1.22-1.52 m (4-5 feet).

Table 2.1: CURRENT WATERLOGGING AND SALl. Y CONDITIONS

Waterlogging Soil SalinityGroundwater Percent Cumu- EC0 PercentTable Depth of CCA lative (mmohs/cm of CCA Cumulative(feet) at 250C)

< .76 11 11 Over 16 4 41.76 - 1.22 17 28 8 - 16 1 51.22 - 1.52 21 49 4 - 8 7 12over 1.52 51 100 < 4 88 100

2.10 About 12% of the cca is affected by soil salinity above thresholdtolerance levels of most crops12. Unless the excessive seepage from theirrigation system is controlled and surface drainage relief is provided,waterlogging and salinity will keep increasing. At the current rate of increase,it is estimated that by the year 2000 about 50% of the cca would have water tabledepth of less than 1.2 m and EC, of more than 8 mmohs/cm, and by 2010 this sharewould increase to 65%.

Farm Size and Tenure

2.11 Table 2.2 shows the tenurial arrangements in the project area. Theaverage farm size (5.8 ha) is about the same as the average for the country(about 5.0 ha). Owner-operated farms account for half of the land, tenant-operated farms about 29%, and owner-cum-tenant farms the remaining 21%. Abouthalf of the farms are fragmented.

12/ Threshold tolerance level of soil salinity for sugarcane is EC, 1.7,for rabi fodder 1.5, kharif fodder 1.8, rice 3.0, wheat 6.0 andcotton 7.7. Source: Naas and Hoffman, Crop Salt Tolerance CurrentAssessment, Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Division, ASCE, June1977.

- 14 -

Table 2.2: TENURIAL ARRANGEMENTS AND FARM SIZE (ha)

Number of Farms Farm Area AverageFarm Size Number X Area (ha) % Size (ha)

Small (less than 5 ha) 9,701 54 26,193 25 2.7Medium (5-10 ha) 5,588 31 33,528 32 6.0Large (over 10 ha) 2.714 15 45.053 A3 16.6

TOTAL 18,003 100 104,774 100 5.8

Source: Based on Pakistan Agriculture Census Report, 1980 (Punjab).

Cropping Intensities and Yields

2.12 The major crops in the project area are wheat, cotton, sugarcane,fodder, and IRRI rice. These crops account for more than 94% of the croppedarea; the rest is under maize, pulses, and other minor crops. Annual croppingintensity is 129%, with 55% in kharif and 74% in rabi, counting sugarcane in bothseasons. Considering that surface water availability is limited, these croppingintensities are quite high. The main reason is subirrigation from the shallowwater tables. Crop yields are low and vary throughout the project area dependinoupon soil conditions, degree of waterlogging, and farm practices. Yields areabout 1.6 tons/ha for rice, 1.3 tons/ha for cotton, 1.9 tons/ha for wheat, 30tons/ha for sugarcane, and 0.8 tons/ha for oilseeds. Crop productiotn and yieldsare adversely affected by shortage of irrigation water during periods of peakcrop water requirements, waterlogging and salinity, and insufficient supply ofnon-water inputs (good quality seeds, fertilizer, and pesticides) and services.

Agricultural Inputs and Services

2.13 Inputs. There is a shortage of improved seeds in the project area.Most farmers keep their own seeds or buy inferior quality from local dealersbecause of poor distribution facilities and low supplies. Available supplies ofImproved seeds meet about 7% of the area's requirement for wheat, 12% for cotton,and less than 1% for rice. The corresponding figures for Punjab are 40% forcotton, and 20-30% for wheat and rice. The Punjab Seed Corporation (PSC) is themain source of improved seeds for cotton, wheat and rice. Some private suppliershave also recently started marketing seeds for cotton, maize, and some minorcrops. These private suppliers are expected to play an increasing role in thefuture, particularly for cotton and 'inor crops. Seeds produced by the PSC areprocured by the Punjab Agricultural Development and Supplies Corporation (PADSC)and distributed through its seven depots. PSC also has about 34 private dealersin the area. Currently, neither PSG nor PADSC have bulk storage facilities forseed in the project area. This also makes timely availability of improved seedsdifficult.

2.14 Fertilizer use in the project area is low. In 1987-88, totalfertilizer application was estimated to be 62 kg/ha, against 117 kg/ha for Punjaband 86 kg/ha for Pakistan. Fertilizer applications are generally comparable tothe Punjab average, except in areas with high water table and soil salinity.Fertilizer distribution is handled both by private and public sector agenc'es;they include National Fertilizer Marketing Limited, a subsidiary of the publicNational Fertilizer Corporation, and three private companies, Fauji Fertilizer,Davood-Hercules, and Exxon. PADSC also distributes phosphatic fertilizers, whichare mostly imported. Due to centralized imports of these fertilizers, suppliesare often erratic and shortages occur during peak demand periods.

- 15 -

2.15 Pesticide use in the project area is higher than on average inPunjab, mainly because of cotton of which 60%-80% is sprayed. Pesticide andherbicide marketing is mainly handled by the private sector.

2.16 Agricultural Suponrt Services. Agricultural extension services in

the project area are being strengthened under the on-going Agricultural Extensionand Adaptive Research Project, Phase II (AEAR-II, Cr. 1762-PAK), which introducedthe Training and Visit (T&V) system all over Punjab in 1987. The Deputy DirectorAgriculture (DDA) of Bahawalnagar district, assisted by three Extra AssistantDirectors of Agriculture (EADA) at the tehsil headquarters of Haroonabad,Chishtian, and Bahawalnagar, is in charge of the extension activities in theproject area. The nearest Adaptive Research Farm is at Vihari, about 50 km fromthe project area.

2.17 To enhance the capability of the extension service in providingadvice tailored to the needs of farmers in a specific area, on-farm research isbeing introduced under AEAR-II and the Second Agricultural Research Project (Cr.2154-PAK). Technical assistance is being provided to support the adaptiveresearch program in developing systematic on-farm research, introducingcomputerized data processing, strengthening research-extension linkages, andadvising on procedures for developing extension messages. Diagnostic surveys areto be carried out through multi-disciplinary teams of extension and researchstaff to help develop appropriate research programs to so'Lve farmers' priorityneeds in various agro-climatic zones.

Marketing

2.18 In Pakistan, both government and the private sector are engaged in

procurement and marketing of farm output. Government procurement throughdesignated agencies covers wheat, cotton, rice, gram, potatoes, onions, oilseedsand sugarcane. Prices for these products are fixed taking into consideration thecost of production, domestic demand, supply and stock position, domestic and

international prices, and possible impact on the cost of living. Support pricesthrough risk transfer are to provide incentives to farmers (at substantial costto government, which sometimes leads to a situation where a support price is setbut no transactions take place because no budget is provided).

2.19 Farmers sell surplus production to individual buyers, government or

semi-government procurement agencies and agro-processing plants, or at villagemarkets where transactions are carried out by brokers, traders, and commissionagents. Further up the marketing chain is a wide network of town markets through

which agricultural commodities from the village markets are channeled by brokers,wholesalers and retailers to the larger urban centers for sale to consumers andfor export. Present marketing and processing facilities are adequate to handlethe project's estimated incremental outputs.

2.20 Currently, about 60% of Pakistan's wheat production is consumed on

the farm or sold in the open market. The rest is marketed in the public sector.Public sector procurement is carried out by the Provincial Food Departments and

the Pakistan Agricultural Storage and Services Corporation (PASSCO). About half

of Pakistan's total paddy production is consumed on the farm, while most of themarketable surplus is bought by the state-owned Rice Export Corporation (RECP)

and is exported. Cotton and sugarcane are sold, either directly or through an

intermediary, to ginneries and sugar mills. Ginned cotton is consumeddomestically as well as exported by the state-owned Cotton Export Corporation and

private firms. In areas where there is no sugar mill, sugarcane is usuallyprocessed into gur (raw sugar) for local consumption.

- 16 -

2.21 In the project area, the tehail headquarters of Haroonabad,Bahawalnagar and Chishtian are the main marketing centers for farm inputs andoutputs. Most of the products are handled by commission agents. Wheat, paddy,and cotton are also procured by public sector agencies, including the Punjab FoodDepartment, PASSCO, Rice Export Corporation, and Cotton Export Corporation. Mostof the sugarcane is sold to the sugar mills at Chishtian and Bahawalnagar and therest is converted into gur. About 30 ginneries purchase cotton from the projectarea, and cotton seed is sold back to farmers or to oil expellers.

III. THE PROJECT

3.1 The proposed six-year project (FY93-98) would cover a command area of104,774 ha in Punjab province and include : (i) Water Conservation Measures(installation of interceptor drains, canal lining, improvement of watercourses);(ii) Surface Drainage; (iii) Irrigation and Drainage Research; (iv) Monitoringand Evaluation of project impact; and (v) Technical Assistance and Training,field trials for subsurface drainage and funding for preparing a future project.

Proiect Concept and Obiectives

3.2 The project is designed to remove severe vater supply constraints byimproving the delivery efficiency of canals and W/Cs and at the same timereducing seepage to the groundwater. Improved control through lining ofdistributaries and minors, resulting in more equitable distribution of water,would bring efficient water use within W/C commands. These water conservationmeasures combined with surface drainage would be instrumental in lowering thewater table and reducing eventual subc>arface drainage needs. Although precisequantification of the impact of thcs.c naasures on the groundwater table isdifficult to assess in advance, rs.3T-ces are that on average the proposedproject would cause the water tuoLe in the project area to fall by one to one-and-half feet (0.30-0.46 m). As a result, upward movement of salts fromgroundwater to soils would be reduced by about four tons per acre (on average)annually due to the lower rate of evaporation from the groundwater table. Amonitoring program to quantify the project impact, evaluate the performance ofproposed interventions and assess the subsurface drainage requirements for phase2 would be implemented under the project.

3.3 The main objectives of the project are to: (i) raise agriculturalproduction, employment and income; (ii) reduce the need for expensive subsurfacedrainage and environmentally harmful effects related with such drainage; (iii)improve the equity of water distribution; (iv) develop models for integratedirrigated agriculture management involving a "demand based" system and enhancedfarmer participation; and (v) improve the capability of WAPDA and GOPunjab toplan, implement, operate, and maintain similar projects. The first threeobjectives would be achieved by:

(a) increasing water supply to reduce the gap between crop water demandand irrigation supply, improving water management, and drainingexcess storm water;

(b) slowing down land deterioration due to waterlogging and salinitythrough reduction of seepage losses from irrigation channels andimprovement of on-farm water management; and

(c) improving availability of agr:cultural inputs and services;

- 17 -

The last two objective would be achieved through applied research, and provisionof technical assistance and training.

Froiect Description

(A) InterceRtor Drains (Base Cost USS 21.98 million).

3.4 Approximately 280 km of horizontal interceptor drai.ns (subsurfacetile drains) would be installed along the Malik and Hakra branches, anc. Sirajwah,Murad, Khatan and Harunabad distributaries (Annex 1, Table 2). Thesie drainswould intercept a significant part of the seepage from the canals and hencereduce drainage requirements and provide supplemental water for irrigation. Asingle line of drain would be installed on both sides of the channels with theexception of Malik branch and Murad distributary where drain would be providedonly on the left side. The drains would be installed about 50-150 m from thecanals. Each drain would comprisi of a single line of plastic (PVC or PE)perforated pipe laid by trenching machines on a 1:2000 slope with river rungravel envelop to a maximum depth of about 3 m. Pipe diameter would vary from102 mm to 385 mm, depending on the soil condition, seepage rate, and drainlength. Approximately 153 sumps would be provided, each about 1830 m (6000 feet)apart with manholes every 305 m (1000 feet), and two drains would discharge intoone sump. Discharge from the sumps would be pumped directly into a watercourseor returned to the canal. The electric energy for the sump pumps wr-ild besupplied by a transmission grid of about 230 km of 11 KV lines. Step-downtransformers (about 100) would be installed to provide power to each pump. Theoperation of the system would be controlled by a series of automatic devices ateach sump. There would be devices for monitoring the level of water in thesumps, the amount of sump discharge, and i\ status of operation of each pump.The recorded data would be transmitted through a power line carrier to a gridstation serving a bank of sumps. Personnel at the grid station can control theoperation of each sump, except when overridden by thermal breakers. For thedesign of interceptor drains, a two-dimensional analysis developed by the USBureau of Reclamation has been used. Installation of the these drains would becoordinated with canal lining and watercourse improvement. Base cost of thecomponent includes cost of civil works, consulting services for design andsupervision, equipment (Annex 5), incremental staff salaries and operatingexpenditure required for the implementation.

3.5 The system of interceptor drains would be first installed along theHakra and Malik branches. A program satisfactory to the Project CoordinationCommittee (para 5.13) would be prepared and implemented for monitoringperformance of the installed drains. Interceptor drains would then be installedalong the remaining channels (Annex 1, Table 2) provided monitoring indicatesthat they will perform satisfactorily along the smaller channels as well.

(B) Lining of Distributaries and Minors (Base Cost USS 18.52 million).

3.6 Approximately 18 channels (Annex 1, Table 3) with original designdischarge of up to 2.83 cumec (100 cusecs) would be lined. The total length of

the lined sections would be about 180 'Km. The actual discharge of most of thesechannels is about 20% higher than the design. The lined section would bedesigned to carry the actual discharge, and adequate freeboard would be providedfor safe operation. This would result in a slight increase in the capacity todeliver water. Moghas would be remodelled, canal structures improved, andcontrol structures provided to meet water management rsquirements. To provideeffective seepage control, the lining would consist of geo-membrane placed oncompacted subgrade and covered with a hard protective cover of concrete slabs

- 18 -

with water tight joints. Trapezoidal sections with side slope of 1:1 for up to0.85 cumec and 1.5:1 for higher discharge with non-silting velocities would beused. Channels of up to 0.3 cumec (10 cusecs) capacity would be lined usingprecast sections, possibly during the closure periods. Assurances were obtainedthat GOP. WAPDA and PID would observe groger specifications and design criteriaand take measures to control quality of construction acceptable to IDA.

3.7 Lining would practically eliminate seepage losses and, as the area isunderlain by SGW, would conserve valuable surface water. Reduction in seepagewould also help in controlling the groundwater table. Improvement in watercontrol and remodelling of moghas, specially towards the tail-end reaches, wouldensure equitable water delivery to chaks, resulting in an overall increase inwater use efficiency. Increased capacity and improved control would providegreater flexibility to follow the fluctuations in crop demand in the operation ofthe channels. Assurances were obtained from GOP. GOPuniab and PID that adeguatewater supplv would be provided to the proiect area and operation of the channelswould be modified to meet crop water requirements as closely as possible. Theproject's research component would provide guidelines for such modifications.Canal lining would be coordinated with the installation of interceptor drains andwatercourse improvement. The cost estimate for this component includes provisionfor lining the smaller channels currently ear-marked for the interceptor drains.

(C) Watercourse Improvement (Base Cost US5 0.80 million).

3.8 Out of 668 W/Cs in (Annex 1, Table 1) the project area, about 134have already been improved. A voluntary and participatory program similar tothe OFWN-III would be instituted for the improvement of the remainingwacercourses. Watercourse improvement would be provided on a first come basis.It is estimated that about 340 (about 65 percent) watercourses would be improvedunder the project. Civil works material would be provided by OFWM-III (Cr. 2245-PAK, Ln. 3327-PAK), and only the cost of additional field staff, transport andequipment would be provided by this project. Four additional field teams, havingthe same composition as under OFWN-III, would be needed to implement thiscomponent. However, recruitment of new staff would not be necessary as stafffrom CWMP (Cr. 1487-PAK), scheduled to ciose by July 1992, would be assigned tothis project.

3.9 OFWM-III specifications, design criteria, and quality controlprocedures would be followed in W/C improvement. Precision land leveling ofapproximately 1200 ha, OFWM demonstration centers, training of 50 OFWM fieldstaff and 40 agriculture extension personnel would also be provided. Provisionhas been made for approximately 60 staff-months of local supervisory consultantsfor verification of design, quantity and quality of civil works. Terms ofreference for the supervisory consultants would be the same as under OFWM-III.Since OFWM-III is expected to close in FY95, assurances were obtained from GOP.GOPuniab and PAD that improvement of watercourses in the project area would becompleted bX June 30. 1995. W/C improvement would be coordinated withinstallation of interceptor drains and canal lining.

(D) Surface Drainage System (Base Cost USM 7.05 million)

3.10 Surface Drains. At present, WAPDA has planned 16 surface drains ofabout 308 km length in the project area, and design of most of these drains hasbeen completed. Construction of the drains and evaporation ponds is divided into12 contracts. A list of these contracts and their status is in Annex 1, Table 4.Due to shortage of funds, progress on construction of the surface drains has beenlimited. Since timely completion of the drains is essential for achieving

- 19 -

project objectives, GOP requested that construction of remaining drains beincluded in the project. Therefore, drains for which construction contracts arenot yet awarded would be included in the project. Assurances were obtained fromGOP and WAPDA that work under the on-going contracts (number SC-1. SC-2. SC-3.SC-4. NC-7. NC-8 and NC12) would be coordinated with construction of the rest ofthe drainage system under this project. Review of the existing surface drainageplans revealed that some of the area requiring surface drainage is not adequatelycovered. Therefore, nine additional drains of 38 km length would be includedunder this project. The total length of surface drains in the project area wouldthus be 352 km, of which 159 km would be financed under the project (Annex 1,Table 5 and 6).

3.11 Surface drains would be open, unlined channels with minimum width of4 feet and side slopes of 1 vertical to 2.5 horizontal. Mild side slopes areadopted to reduce sloughing because soil in the area is sandy. Bed slopes wouldconform to the topography of the area. Drains would be generally deep enoughallowing drainage of the maximum number of depressions, collection of somesubsurface water, and ensuring minimum seepage of saline effluent if dischargedinto these drains by the subsurface drainage system envisaged under Phase 2.

3.12 Drainage Effluent Disposal. The volume of surface drainage effluentvaries from year to year depending upon the intensity of storms in the monsoonseason. The maximum is estimated to be about 47,300 acre feet based on thehighest recorded storms in 1978. The salt concentration of the drainage effluentis estimated to range from 600 to 1,000 ppm. The effluent would, therefore, beusable for agriculture. Since the project area does not have a gravity outlet tothe sea or to the Sutlej river, the surface drains would discharge into twonatural depressions (tobas), Khanduwala and Thulanwala, located in the southwestof the project area in the Cholistan desert. These tobas are approximately 15 kmfrom irrigated land and some 13 km from the recently discovered confined freshgroundwater aquifer at Mojgarh/Fort Abbas. The Khanduwala toba covers an area of1700 ha (4200 acres) and has a storage capacity of about 43,000 acre feet. Thiswould provide sufficient capacity to hold the maximum estimated volume ofeffluent (1978 storms). A portion of the Thulanwala Toba would be used only inthe event of extremely high storms. A program to use water from the surfacedrains and tobas for agricultural purposes would be developed under the researchcomponent of the project.

(E) Field Trials & Monitoring for Phase 2 (Base Cost USS3.25 million).

3.13 To facilitate the preparation of future subsurface drainage systems,funding would be provided for field trials for subsurface drainage, monitoringand evaluation, data gathering, research and development of regional groundwatermodel. The need for subsurface drainage in the project area would be assessedafter completion of the proposed measures based on the monitoring and evaluationresults. However, envisaged activities would be useful for the preparation ofdrainage projects in the Indus basin and would provide answers to severalimportant questions in the drainage sector.

3.14 Field Trials for Subsurface Drainage. The proposed field trialsare designed to test subsurface drainage parameters and synthetic fabric materialto be used as envelope. The drainage paramsters such as drainage coefficient,drain spacing, and drain depth would be tested in the primary fields of the trialareas, whereas testing of synthetic fabric envelopes would be done in separateplots adjacent to the primary fields. About three to six trial sites rangingfrom about 60 ha (150 acres) to 405 ha (1000 acres) would be selected coveringall soil types in the project area. The test drains would be laid at an average

- 20 -

depth of 1.7 m (5.5 feet) and at 2.4 m (8.0 feet). Drain spacing would rangefrom 92 m (300 feet) to 275 m (900 feet) depending on soil type and drain depth.The drains woule. be tested for S (estimated drains spacing), 0.5 S and 2 S at thesame site with an appropriate buffer zone between each layout pattern. River-rungravel envelope would be provided for the drains used to test the drainageparameters. For testing the synthetic fabric envelope, at every site one drainof 610 m (2000 feet) length would be installed with fabric envelope and sand, andanother with fabric envelope only. Observation wells would be provided tomeasure water table fluctuations.

3.15 The field trials would provide basis of subsurface drainage research,such as drainage parameters, suitable depths for drain pipes, constructionmethods for pipe drains etc. A database and information system would be preparedand models to simulate the groundwater and salt balance and transport would bedeveloped. Further details are in Annex 2.

3.16 Monitoring of Land and Water Conditions. To assess the effect ofwater conservation measures (lining and interceptor drains) and surface drainage,the project would provide for detailed monitoring of land and water conditions.Monitoring would include fluctuations in the water table, and quality ofgroundwater and surface drainage water, soil salinity and other hydrologicalparameters. The fresh groundwater potential in the project area would beassessed and methods for safe extraction would be proposed. Remote sensingtechnology would be used to the extent possible. Overall monitoring activitiesare outlined in Annex 3.

(F) Irrijation and Drainage Research (Base Cost USS 4.66 million).

3.17 A research component is included in the project in order to providequantitative information to specific planning and implementation questions ofrelevance to this and other projects in irrigation and drainage. Pakistan has along history of research in irrigated agriculture and full use of this researchis being made in the present project. More research is needed, however, becauseof the specificity of the project site and also because previous research inirrigation and drainage has often been fragmented, yielding results that aresometimes contradictory and often cannot be directly applied to field conditions.

3.18 The overall objective of the research component is to refine thecritical elements in the planning and implementation of irrigation and drainageprojects in the Eastern Sadiqia region. Particular emphasis will be placed onresearch questions that will integrate the improvement of water use efficiencywith improved water and land management in the project area. The resultsobtained will also be relevant to other areas of Pakistan. The research componentconsists of the following five subcomponents: (i) evaluation of the impact ofwaterlogging and salinity on crop production; (ii) introduction of improvedtechnology for planning and monitoring irrigation and drainage projects, and landand water conditions in general; (iii) assessing performance of different typesof canal lining; (iv) improvement o- irrigation management with a view to matchirrigation supply with crop water demand that is integrated irrigated agriculturemanagement; and (v) Agriculture extension support. The four themes of researchshould be seen as organical y linked and close interaction will be maintained forthe exchange of data and re ults. The extension activities would focus on thespecific needs of the project area and would be instrumental in wider applicationof the results of waterlogging and salinity research.

3.19 The topics included in the research component are generallyconsistent with previous findings and recommendations of technical and scientific

- 21 -

panels who have studied the question of irrigation and drainage research inPakistan13. These setivities would be coordinated with rhe other components ofthe project, specially the monitoring of land and water conditions and projectimpact. In order to implement pilot programs under the integrated irrigatedagriculture component, assurance has been obtained that the Directorate of CWN.in association with the PID. would submit a draft report containing Rroposals forformalizing farmers organizations. and conceptual design of a demand based svstemfor the Bank's review by September 30. 1993 and the proposed pilot programs wouldbe implemented during the project imolementation period. For further details ofirrigation and drainage research component see Annex 4.

(G) Monitorine & Evaluation of Project Imoact(Base Cost US$0.31 million).

3.20 The project would include a program for monitoring and evaluation ofproject impact. Required agro-economic data would be collected under thiscomponent. Information on physical conditions gathered for Phase 2 preparationwould be utilized in the evaluation. A baseline survey covering agro-economic,social, and water management conditions prior to the project was completed in1989 by WMED, WAPDA (para 2.5). The monitoring and evaluation would include: (a)impact evaluation in terms of agricultural production, income and employment,situation of small farmers, and secondary effects on the regional economy; (b)cropping pattern and cropping intensities, and net farm income; and (c) impact onwater use, and equity in distribution.

(H) Technical Assistance and Training (Base Cost USS 0.78 million14)

3.21 The project would engage interna-ionally reputed specialists toestablish and review design criteria, specifications and construction methods forcanal lining and interceptor drains; advise in the formulation of research andmonitoring programs; and assist in project management and overall planning.Training would include the study of modern construction techniques, projectplanning and management. Visiting experts would conduct short-term trainingcourses. The project would also fund short term overseas training for projectstaff.

3.22 In addition to the specialist consultants, the project would provideconsulting services for preparation of detailed designs and bidding documents andconstruction supervision of interceptor drains, surface drains, canal lining,OFWN, phase preparation and research component. Assurances were obtained fromWAPDA. PID. and PAD that consultants would be recruited following Bank suidelinesunder terms of reference acceRtable to IDA. Assurances were also obtained thatthe evaluation of the proRosals received for the consulting services would becompleted and furnished to IDA prior to Credit effectiveness.

13. See for example: IWASRI/UNDP. 1989. "Evaluation of Waterlogging andSalinity Research in Pakistan." Publication No. 7. International Waterlogging andSalinity Research Institute. Lahore; and Planning Commiss'on. 1978. "ResearchIssues Affecting Agricultural Development Policy -The report of the Indus Basinresearch assessment group" Planning Division, Government of Pakistan.

14 Cost of specialist consultants and training only. Cost of design andsupervisory consultants is included in the respective project components.

- 22 -

(I) Future Project Preparation (Base Cost USS 1.00 million).

3.23 The project would provide funds for future project preparation. If

monitoring and evaluation of Phase-i shows that some areas would still require

subsurface drainage, these funds would be used to prepare detailed designs for

subsur-face drainage. The dcsign of the phase 2 would be greatly facilitated by

the drainage research undertaken in the pro4ect. Funds not needed for

preparation of tubsurface drainage component of the second phase would be used to

prepare another water sector project.

IV. PROJECT COSTS. FINANCING AND PROCUREMENTProject Costs

4.1 Total project cost over the six-year period (July 1992-June 1998) is

estimated to be Rs 1,944 million (US$ 70.65 million equivalent) with a foreign

exchange component of Rs 473.49 million or 24%. Estimates are based on June 1992

prices and include about Rs 208 million in taxes and duties. The project cost

suimmary is presented in Tables 4.1 and 4.2 and details are given in Annex 6.

Cost of interceptor drains is based on consultants' estimates. Cost of canal

lining is based on quantities estimated by the Punjab Irrigation Department and

prevailing market prices. Cost of the on-farm water management component

includes the recurring costs of additional field staff only; cost of civil works

would be borne by the OFWM-III Project. Cost of surface drains are based on

WAPDA's estimates prepared for the Fordwah Eastern Sadiqia Remaining (SCARP VIII)

project. Cost of monitoring and Phase 2 preparation is based on the feasibility

report by WAPDA and consultants. Physical contingencies are estimated to be 8%

for interceptor drains and monitoring and Phase 2 preparation, and 10% for canal

lining and surface drains. Total physical contingencies are about 7% of base

costs. Price contingencies are 13% of base cost plus physical contingencies

using estimated annual inflation rates shown in the footnote to Table 4.2.

Table 4.1: COST SUMMARY BY COMPONENT

Rupees (Million) USS (Million) PercentForeign

Local Foreign Total Local Foreign Total Exchange

Interceptor Drains 403.64 156.86 560.49 15.83 6.15 21.98 28.0

Canal Lining 354.86 117.30 472.16 13.92 4.60 18.52 24.8

On Farm Water Management 17.86 2.54 20.40 0.70 0.10 0.80 12.5

Surface Drains 149.79 30.07 179.86 5.87 1.18 7.05 16.7

Monitoring & Phase 2 Prep 58.88 23.91 82.79 2.31 0.94 3.25 28.9

Irrigation Drainage Res. 103.87 14.87 118.74 4.07 0.58 4.66 12.5

Monitoring & Evaluation 7.80 0.00 7.80 0.31 0.00 0.31 0.0

Technical Assist. & Trng. 14.08 5.92 20.00 0.55 0.23 0.78 29.6

Future Proj. Preparation 14.55 10.95 25.50 0.57 0.43 1.00 42.9

Total Baseline Costs 1125.33 362.41 1487.74 44.13 14.21 58.34 24.4

Physical Contingencies 77.35 25.65 103.00 3.03 1.01 4.04 24.9

Price Contingencies /a 267.94 85.43 353.38 6.27 2.00 8.27 24.2

Total project cost /b 1470.63 473.49 1944.12 53.44 17.22 70.65 24.4

- 23 -

Table 4.2: COST BY SUMMARY ACCOUNTS

Rupees (Million) USS (Million) PercentForeign

Local Foreign Total Local Foreign Total Exchange

Civil Works 854.34 288.39 1142.73 33.50 11.31 44.81 25.2Consulting Services 83.45 53.78 137.23 3.27 2.11 5.38 39.2Admin. & Operat. Expendi. 171.83 4.53 176.36 6.74 0.18 6.92 2.6Equipment 7.56 7.56 15.13 0.30 0.30 0.59 50.0Vehicles 8.15 8.15 16.30 0.32 0.32 0.64 50.0

Total Baseline Cost 1125.33 362.41 1487.74 44.13 14.21 58.34 24.4Physical Contingencies 77.35 25.65 103.00 3.03 1.01 4.04 24.9Price Contingencies /a 267.94 85.43 353.38 6.27 2.00 8.27 24.2

Total Project Cost /b 1470.63 473.49 1944.12 53.44 17.22 70.65 24.4

/a Based on following inflation rates (December 12, 1991)FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98

Local 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0Foreign 3.4 3.9 3.85 3.8 3.8 3.8

/b Includes taxes and duties of about Rs 208 m or US$ 7.6 m equivalent.

Financing

4.2 The IDA Credit of SDR 39.6 million (US$ 54.20 million) would financeabout 86% of the total project cost net of taxes and duties or 77% of the totalcost. GOP/GOPunjab would finance the remaining US$ 16.45 million equivalent,including taxes and duties, or 23% of total cost. Approval of the project's PC-iby the Executive Council of the National Economic Committee (ECNEC) would be acondition of credit effectiveness. Table 4.3 shows the proposed financing plan.

Table 4.3: PROJECT FINANCING(US$ million)

Total GOP/ IDA IDACost GOPuniab X

Civil Works 55.44 13.86 41.58 75Consulting Services 6.12 1.22 4.90 80Administration and Operating Exp. 7.80 0.78 7.02 90Equipment 0.62 0.25 0.37 60Vehicles 0.67 0.33 0.33 50

TOTAL 70.65 16.45 54.20 77

Procurement

4.3 Procurement arrangements are summarized in Table 4.4 below. Civilworks for interceptor drains, surface drains, canal lining and field trials fordrainage would be procured through international competitive bidding (ICB)following IDA guidelines. To the extent practicable, contracts for civil works

- 24 -

Table 4.4: PROCUREMENT(US$ million) /a

Procurement Method Total CostICB LJB Othe

CIVIL WORKS

Interceptor Drains 23.90 23.90(17.93) (17.93)

Canal lining 20.61 20.61(15.46) (15.46)

Surface drains 6.29 1.50/c 7.79(4.72) (1.12) (5.84)

Monitoring and Phase 2Preparation 2.30 0.50/b 2.80

(1.73) (0.37) (2.10)

Irrigation & Drainage Research 0.34/c 0.34(0.25) (0.25)

Sub-total 53.10 1.84 0.50 55.44(39.84) (1.37) (0.37) (41.58)

Consulting Services 6.12 6.12(4.90) (4.90)

Administration & Operating 7.80/d 7.80Expenditure (7.02) (7.02)

Equipment 0.62/e 0.62(0.37) (0.37)

Vehicles 0.67 0.67(0.33) (0.33)

Total 59.89 2.46 8.30 70.65(45.07) (1.74) (7.39) (54.20)

a/ Includes taxes, duties and contingencies. Figures in parentheses are the

respective amounts financed by IDA./b WAPDA force account for monitoring components./c Scattered sites, ICB not appropriate./d Incremental staff. salaries, and operating expenditure./e Consists of relatively small and non-homogenous packages unsuitable for ICB.

- 25 -

shall be grouped in bid packages estimated to cost the equivalent of (a) not lessthan US$ 10.00 million in the case of interceptor drains and canal lining, and(b) not less than US$ 3.0 million in the case of surface drains. Construction ofsmall size additional surface drains (AD-1 to AD-9), estimated to cost less thanthe equivalent of US$ 200,000 per contract, up to an aggregate amount not toexceed the equivalent of US$ 1.5 million would be procured through localcompetitive bidding (LCB). Vehicles required for various project componentswould also be procured through ICB. The Bank's sample bidding documents (SBD)for procurement of works and goods would be used. Office, surveying, flowmeasuring and other equipment, consisting of relatively small and unrelatedpackages that would not attract foreign bidders, estimated to cost less than theequivalent of US$ 50,000 per contract, up to an aggregate amount not to exceedthe equivalent of US$ 620,000 may be procured through LCB. Minor civil works inthe irrigation and drainage research component scattered in the area, notsuitable for ICB, would be procured through LCB. Tender documents forprocurements exceeding US$ 20,000 equivalent for equipment, US$ 100,000 forvehicles, and USS 200,000 equivalent for works would be subject to prior reviewby IDA. Consultants for various project components would be selected followingBank guidelines for use of consultants.

Disbursements

4.4 Proceeds of the IDA credit would be disbursed against the followingexpenditure categories:

Cate orv Percentage to be Financed

(i) Civil Works. 75% of expenditure.

(ii) Consulting services. 80% of expenditure.

(iii) Incremental staff salaries, 90% of expenditures, and 100% ofallowances and operating expenditure for training.expenditure, and training.

(iv) Equipment and Vehicles 100% of foreign expenditures,100% of local expenditures(ex-factory costs) and, 60% oflocal expenditures for itemsprocured locally.

4.5 Disbursements for contracts of civil works below US$ 200,000equivalent, equipment below US$ 20,000 equivalent and vehicles below US$ 100,000equivalent and all incremental staff salaries would be made against certifiedstatements of expenditures (SOEs). Full documentation would be retained byimplementing agencies for review by supervision missions and would be subject toaudit by independent auditors. All other contracts would be fully documented.To facilitate payment of eligible expenditures one Special Account each would beestablished by General Manager (Water) Central WAPDA, Chief Engineer CoordinatilonPID and Punjab Agriculture Department (PAD) with initial deposits of US$ 2.0million, US$ 1.0 million and US$ 0.15 million respectively, representingreimbursable portion of estimated expenditures for four months. The PAD SpecialAccount would meet the requirements of OFWM, Agriculture extension andDirectorate of CWM. The credit proceeds would be disbursed over six and a halfyears. The disbursement profile is based on the experience gained under similarprojects in Punjab. Since all project activities are to be carried out in onecontiguous area, it is expected that project implementation would proceed

- 26 -

smoothly and faster than projects that have components located in all the fourprovinces. The estimated disbursement schedule is given in Annex 7. The CreditClosing date would be December 31, 1998.

4.6 Accounts and Audit All implementing agencies (WAPDA, PID and PAD) wouldmaintain separate accounts for the project. Assurances were obtained duringnegotiations that: (a) orolect accounts of all agencies. including SpecialAccounts would be audited annually by independent auditors acceptable to IDA: and(b) audit reports would be sent to IDA within nine months of the end of eachfiscal year. Audit reports would include separate opinions of the auditors on(i) reimbursements claimed on the basis of SOEs and (ii) operation of the SpecialAccounts.

V. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION. MAINTENANCE AND COST RECOVERY

Institutional Arrangements

5.1 Implementing Agencies. The project would be implemented by WAPDA,and the Punjab Irrigation (PID) and Agriculture (PAD) Departments. The proposedorganization is shown in Chart-l and the roles of the implementing agencies aredescribed below.

5.2 WAPDA would be responsible for: (i) construction of interceptor andsurface drainage systems; (ii) monitoring and Phase 2 preparation (field trialsfor subsurface drainage, monitoring of land and water conditions, and assessmentof fresh groundwater potential); (iii) research on the impact of waterlogging andsalinity on crop production, performance of different types of lining, andimproved technology for planning and monitoring; (iv) monito3ring and evaluationof project impact; and (v) coordination among the implementing agencies.

5.3 The responsibility for interceptor and surface drains would beassigned to a Project Director (Drainage) headquartered at Bahawalnagar andassisted by four Executive Engineers (XENs) (two existing, and two additional forthe interceptor drains). The Project Director (Drainage) would be responsiblefor:

(i) assisting in the recruitment of supervisory consultants, procurement ofvehicles and equipment for the interceptor drainage and surface drainagesystem;

(ii) carrying out condition surveys of channels to be provided withinterceptor drains in collaboration with WAPDA's Planning andInvestigation Organization (P&I);

(iii) reviewing detailed designs and tender documents prepared by theconsultants prior to their submission to IDA;

(iv) assisting in awarding and administering contracts for interceptor andsurface drain construction;

(v) monitoring the impact of interceptor drains;

(vi) coordinating and consolidating work plans and quarterly progress reportsfor individual project components for submission to the ProjectCoordination Committee and IDA; and

- 27 -

(vii) maintaining project accounts (including Special Account) for theactivities under his responsibility, preparing withdrawal applications,and arranging timely submission of accounts to the Director GeneralAudit WAPDA.

5.4 The Project Director Planning (Water) Central. WAPDA would haveoverall responsibility for field trials for preparation of Phase 2. TheInternational Waterloggine and Salinity Research Institute (IWASRI) would beresponsible for research on: (i) tile drainage at the field trial sites; and (ii)comparison of different types of lining. For tile drainage research, IWASRI incooperation with Netherlands Research Assistance Project (NRAP) would providesupervisory staff, analyze data, prepare reports, meet the cost of operation andmaintenance of vehicles, and supply some equipment for the field trials. Itwould coordinate its activities with the Project Director Planning (Water)Central, WAPDA's SCARP Monitoring Organization (SMO) and the InternationalIrrigation Management Institute (IIMI-Pakistan). For canal lining research,IWASRI would sub-contract with a suitable organization.

5.5 SMO would be responsible for monitoring of land and water conditions(including the field trial sites) and assessment of fresh groundwater potentialin the project area. It would collaborate with the Project Director (Drainage),Project Director Planning (Water) Central, IWASRI, P&I and the WatercourseMonitoring and Evaluation Directorate (WMED).

5.6 P&I would be responsible for research on the impact of waterloggingand salinity on crop production and the use of improved technology for planningand monitoring. P&I would coordinate its activities with the Project Director(Drainage), Project Director Planning (Water) Central, IWASRI and SM0, andcollaborate closely with IIMI-Pakistan.

5.7 PID would be responsible for canal lining and collaborating with theDirectorate of CWM for the research component on Irrigated AgricultureManagement. An organizational structure similar to ISRP-II (Cr. 1888-PAK) wouldbe established. A Project Implementation Unit (PIU) headed by the Chief EngineerCoordination would be established at Lahore. A Project Director (Lining)assisted by two XENs, posted in the project area, would be responsible for canallining. Each XEN would be assisted by three subdivisional officers (SDOs), ninesub-engineers and support staff. The PIU would be responsible for:

(i) recruiting supervisory consultants, and procuring vehicles and equipmentfor the canal lining component;

(il) carrying out condition surveys of channels to be lined;

(iii) reviewing detailed designs and tender documents prepared by thesupervisory consultants prior to their submission to IDA;

(iv) awarding and administering contracts for canal lining;

(v) coordinating closely with the OFWM field teams on designs of moghas andwatercourses, and maintaining equity of water deliveries followinglining and remodelling of moghas;

(vi) collaborating with CWM Directorate on the research for IrrigatedAgriculture Management;

(vii) preparing and submit:zmng annual work plans and quarterly progress

- 28 -

reports to the Project Director (Drainage) for consolidation;

(viii) monitoring impact of canal lining on: groundwater table; seepage andother conveyance losses; equity of distribution; hydraulic andstructural stability; and level of O&M costs; and

(ix) maintaining project accounts (including the Special Account) for theactivities under its responsibility, preparing withdrawal applications,and arranging timely submission of accounts to the office of theDirector General Audit Punjab.

5.8 The Puniab Agriculture Department would be responsible forwatercourse improvement, extension activities, and research on IrrigatedAgriculture Management.

5.9 The Directorate General of OFNN would be responsible for watercourseimprovement and other OFWM activities, recruitment of supervisory consultants andprocurement of equipment and vehicles for this component. The Directorate woulddesignate a Coordinator for the project and assign four engineering and fouragronomy field teams to the project area to improve watercourses and providewater management advice as envisaged under OFWM-III.

5.10 The Directorate General of Agriculture Extension (DGAE) isresponsible for all extension activities in Punjab under the ongoing T&V program.The DDA Bahawalnagar is in charge of extension activities in the project area.In addition to ongoing activities under the second phase of the PunjabAgricultural Extension and Adaptive Research Project (Cr. 1762-PAK), the DDAwould be responsible for implementing project specific activities with theassistance of the EADAs, AOs and FAs posted in the project area. Specifically,the DDA Bahawalnagar would be responsible for:

(i) maintaining close liaison with the Agricultural Extension and AdaptiveResearch Project as well as the Second Agricultural Research Project(Cr. 2154-PAR) to ensure that diagnostic surveys and area specific on-farm research are carried out and appropriate extension messages aredeveloped for the project area;

(ii) procuring audiovisual equipment and vehicles envisaged under theproject;

(iii) preparing video tapes of extension messages in collaboration with theDirectorate General of Agriculture Information (DGAI) and the OFWMTraining Institute on water management on the farm, and with IWASRI, P&Iand SNO on vaterlogging and salinity, and drainage;

(iv) arranging audiovisual shows (e.g., on land reclamation, control ofvaterlogging and salinity) in selected villages and demonstrating thesame techniques at demonstration centers in coordination with the SeniorSubject Matter Specialist (SSMS) Vehari and the responsible OFWMagronomy field team(s); and

(v) collaborating with P&I (WAPDA), OFWM, Directorate of CWN and PID staffin encouraging farmers to improve water management, maintain equity inwater deliveries after canal lining and outlet remodelling, apply wateraccording to crop needs, and participate in development of seedmultiplication programs.

- 29 -

5.11 The Directorate of CWM would be responsible for research on IrrigatedAgriculture Management. It would assign two interdisciplinary teams headed by asub-project Manager, who would be an agricultural economist. Each team wouldinclude one social organizer, one engineer, one agronomist, and one hydrologist.Staff of required disciplines not available with the Directorate of CWM would berecrutted. The Directorate of OWM, in association with PID, would be responsiblefor:

(i) organizing and training farmer groups, including federations of WUAs;

(ii) carrying out diagnostic surveys and analysis;

(iii) reviewing existing legislation, including, inter alia, WUAsOrdinance/Act, the Canal and Drainage Act and the Warabandi Laws;formulating amendments or new legal instruments to formalize farmerinstitutions and define their role in O&M; and exploring appropriatesubstitutes for Warabandi and alternative arrangements for assessSng andcollecting water charges;

(iv) carrying out resebrch, and preparit.g conceptual designs of canals,structures, and watercourse works, and operational plans for a demandbased irrigation system in collaboration with PID, OFWM and farmergroups;

(v) reviewing progress of construction of civil works and structures for thedemand based system, and awarding and administering contracts for farmercommunity centers and seed storage facilities;

(vi) overseeing and facilitating operation of the demand based system andtraining farmers in assuming O&M responsibilities;

(vii) advising farmers on conjunctive use of ground and surface water wherefeasible and organizing farmers groups for joint utilization of waterfrom, and O&M of, interceptor drain sumps;

(viii) promoting farmer seed multiplication programs and facilitating farmersin obtaining basic seed from the Punjab Seed Corporation, and researchand extension farms; and

(ix) arranging for large scale demonstrations (full watercourse trials) tofacilitate transfer of technology and introduction of improved watermanagement and cultural practices.

5.12 Assurances were obtained from GOP. GOPuniab and WAPDA that allimplementing agencies would furnish annual work programs to IDA for itsconcurrence by March 31 for the following fiscal year starting from FY93

5.13 Pro1ect Coordination. At the project level, the existing ProjectCoordination Committee (PCC), established under the Fourth Drainage Project (Cr.1375-PAK), would be responsible for coordination among the implementing agenciesand facilitating implementation. The PCC would be chaired by the General Manager(Water) Central, WAPDA, and have the following members: (i) from WAPDA: ChiefEngineer, Rahim Yar Khan, Project Director (Drainage), Project Director Planning(Water) Central, Chief Engineer P&I, Chief Engineer SMO, and Director GeneralIWASRI; (ii) from PID: Chief Engineer Coordination, and Project Director(Lining); and (iii) from PAD: Director Field and Area Coordinator, OFWM, DDABahawalnagar and Director CWM. Representatives of farmers (e.g., chairmen of

-s -

WUAs) and District Administration would be invited to the PCC meetings asrequired. The PCC would meet quarterly and the Project Director (Drainage) wouldbe its secretary. The main functions of the PCC would be to: (i) monitorprogress and coordinate scheduling of the various project components; (ii)consolidate and review work plans and progress reports for submission to IDA;(iii) make appropriate recommendations to GOPunjab and WAPDA regarding budgetaryallocations and other matters; and (iv) review status of compliance with variousproject covenants, take appropriate action to resolve issues, and reportunresolved issues to the Policy Committee.

5.14 At the provincial level, the existing Policy Committee would providepolicy guidance and steer project implementation by providing inter-agencycoordination at the highest level. It would be chaired by the Chairman Planningand Development Board and would have the following members: Secretaries ofIrrigation and Power, Agriculture, and Finance, GOPunjab, and General Manager(Water) Central and Project Director Planning (Water) Central, WAPDA. The PolicyCommittee would meet wheneve.1 issues requiring resolution are submitted for itsconsideration and the Project Director (Drainage) would act as its secretary.The main functions of the Policy Committee would be to: (i) resolve issues notsettled by the Project Coordination Committee; (ii) ensure provision of adequatebudgetary allocations for project implementation as well as operation andmaintenance (O&M); an; (iii) formulate and implement policies to enhancebeneficiary particitation and recovery of O&M and investment costs.

Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)

5.15 The main objective of the project is to increase agriculturalproduction through conservation and better management of water and reduction ofwaterlogging and salinity. To determine whether this objective is being met, anM&E program would be carried out that would provide:

(i) an internal management information system for the implementing agencies,to facilitate efficient and environmentally safe implementation; and

(i) an independent external evaluation of the project's impact and thedegree to which it is meeting its objectives.

5.16 Internal Monitoring. The implementing agencies would be responsiblefor collecting and reviewing information on physical and financial progress andimpact of their respective components. They would submit periodic progressreports to the PCC and the Policy Committee. Feedback from external M&E andvarious supervisory consultants would also keep project management informed aboutcurrent and potential implementation problems and the project's impact. Thiswould enable the implementing agencies to take timely action to facilitateimplementation and to make necessary adjustments in project approach or design ofindividual cuoponents to ensure project objectives are met.

5.17 External N&E. Responsibility for external M&E would be assigned toWAPDA's SCARP Monitoring Organization (SMO) in collaboration with WMED,Environmental Unit and IWASRI. SMO would provide overall coordination and havedirect responsibility for:

(i) monitoring physical features such as groundwater elevations and quality,water quality in interceptor and surface drains, soil salinity, andfresh groundwater pockets; and

- 31 -

(ii) monitoring of the evaporation ponds and adjacent areas15, including (a)water quality and build-up of toxic minerals (e.g. selenium, arsenic andlead); (b) vectors such as mosquitos; and (c) impact of water table onagricultural lands surrounding the ponds.

The basic information collected would be used for both Phase 2 p.eparation andevaluation of the physical impact of the project. SMO would develop a monitoringplan to establish frequency of observations, intensity of network, manpowerrequirements, and evaluation procedures. Remote sensing would be used whereappropriate.

5.18 MED would be assigned responsibility for agro-economic M&E.Building upon the Baseline Survey carried out in 1989,16 WMED would initiateproject-wide monitoring immediately after project approval to obtain baselineinformation not already available. It would also select a number of indicatorsfor: (i) determining the rate of input utilizatior (e.g., seeds, fertilizers,pesticides, water deliveries, farm labor, draft power); and (ii) monitoringoutputs, including (a) hydraulic measurements in lined channels to determinedelivery losses and irrigation/application efficiencies, (b) equity of deliveryin lined channels and watercourses, taking into account effects of supplyvariations in upstream channels (branch and main canals), (c) croppingintensities, cropping patterns, yields and production, net farm incomes and cashflows, and (d) WUA operations. Changes in the selected indicators would beassessed and documented on a bi-annual basis and reported to the implementingagenci-.s. This would enable these agencies to make appropriate adjustments inthe design or scheduling of individual components and improve delivery ofservices.

5.19 Assurances were obtained from GOP and WAPDA that the SMO would submitan overall monitoring and evaluation Rrogram defining Drecise resnonsibilities ofvarious agencies (along with draft inter- and intra-agency agreements) andproviding detailed scope of work for IDA approval by December 31. 1992.

gReration. Maintenance and Cost Recovery

b.20 Institutional Responsibilities. WAPDA would be responsible for theoperation and maintenance of the interceptor and surface drains for two yearsafter the completion of works. After this trial period, facilities would behanded over to PID if their overall performance is satisfactory. Operation andmainte:ance cost of surface and interceptor drains is estimated to be about Rs 20mil.ion per year (FY92 prices). O&M responsibility for the irrigation channelsis vested in PID, which is not expected to require additional funding as O&Mrequirement for lined channels would be less than that for unlined channels.Otner facilities, transport and equipment would be operated and maintained by thedepartment to which such items are assigned.

5.21 Budget and Cost Recovery Policies. Although the provincial O&M costfor irrigation and drainage systems have averaged about 9% of the annual

15/ SMO would seek guidance from WAPDA's environmental unit, and take intoaccount findings and recommendations of the ongoing Drainage EnvironmentalAssessment Study, and various health organizations, as necessary.

16/ Agro-Economic Evaluation, Baseline Survey, Fordwah Eastern Sadiqia ProjectPhase-I & II SCARP VIII, Watercourse Monitoring & Evaluation Directorate,Planning and Investigation Organization, WAPDA, October 1989.

- 32 -

provincial budgets over the last five years, the condition of irrigation anddrainage systems are far from satisfactory. About 50% of total O&M allocationsare used for the O&M of the FGW TWs. Consistent with current GOP policies theProvinces are committed not to undertake new investments or replacement of TWsfor public operation in FGW areas. A SCARP transition program to privatize FGWTWs is ongoing in the provinces of Punjab and Sindh. The GOPunjab agreed toexpedite the privatization plans and divest itself of the ownership of the FGWTWs completely by July 1997. To this end, another SCARP transition Projec,., thepreparation of which will start next year as envisaged under the Second SCARPTransition Project would provide continuing assistance in these efforts.However, to ensure availability of adequate funds for maintaining the irrigationand drainage systems 5ncluding the project facilities, it is essential that theGOPunjab makes adequate budgetary allocations to PID. Assurance was obtainedthat Punjab will discuss with IDA by February 15 of each fiscal year beginningwith FY93. the level of funding required for operation and maintenance of thesurface irrigation, fresh groundwater tubewells and drainage facilities in Puniabfor the following fiscal year. and based on mutually agreed funding levels.provide adequate budgetary allocations.

5.22 Cost recovery for irrigation and drainage systems has been a keyissue in the Bank's ongoing dialc;ue with GOP and GOPunjab. In Punjab, therecoveries from water charges are far below O&M allocations. To achieve fullrecovery of 0SM allocations in the Punjab, including the project area, assurancewas obtained that. Puniab shall. through water and/or drainage charges:

(i) by July 1. 1993 achieve a recovery level of at least 35% of the annual 0&_Jcost of its surface irrigation. fresh groundwater tubewell and drainagefacilities:

(ii) by July 1. 1994. achieve a recovery level of at least 45% of such cost:

(iii) by July 1. 1995. achieve a recovery level of at least 55% of such cost:

(iv) by July 1. 1996. achieve a recovery level of at least 70% of such cost:

(v) by July 1. 1997. achieve a recovery level of at least 90% of such cost: and

(vi) by July 1. 1998. achieve and thereafter maintain a recovery level of 100%of such cost.

5.23 It is estimated that at full development of the project facilities,O&M costs at 1992 nrices would be about Rs 240 per ha of cca, or Rs 150 percropped ha or Rs 22 per acre foot of water delivered at the watercourse head. Tofully recover these O&M costs, water charges would account for less than 4% ofcrop production costs and less than 5% of farm income, which is well within thefarmers' capaclty to pay.

Imolementation Schedule

5.24 The PC-i document of the project has been approved by the ProvincialDevelopment Working Party (PDWP), WAPDA and Central Development Working Party(CDWP) and is scheduled to be submitted for ECNEC approval at the next meetingexpected to be held in July 1992. To meet the local cost component, budgetaryallocations have been made in the FY93 budget. Project Director Drainage (WAPDA)and most of associated staff are already in place and Project Director Lining(PID) and associated staff would be appointed by July 31, 1992. With these stepsand a "project launch" workshop in Lahore the project activities would take-off

- 33 -

rapidly after the Board approval.

5.25 The project would be implemented over six years, FY93-FY98 (see Annex8). The first year would be spent mainly in appointing consultants, preparingfinal designs and tender documents for civil works, and procuring equipment andvehicles. About 5% of the civil works would be completed in the first year.Design and preparation work for the surface drains is at an advanced stage,therefore, construction works of this component would proceed relatively faster.Construction of OFWM works would pick up in the first year and would finish byFY95. About 8OX of the civil works would be completed during the project yearsthree through six. Installation of the field trials would finish in thirdproject year and monitoring will continue over the rest of the implementationperiod. Research activities would be spread about evenly over the implementationperiod. The proposed supervision plan for IDA, required staff inputs andexpected skill requirements are given in Annex 11.

5.26 Mid-Term Review In order to evaluate the effectiveness of theproject interventions in achieving project objectives, a mid term review will beundertaken during the third year of the implementation, but not latter than March31. 1995. The review would be carried out jointly by WAPDA, GOPunjab, and IDAaccording to the terms of reference prepared jointly by WAPIDA and GOPunjab sixmonths prior to the review which shall be approved by IDA. This mid-term reviewwould allow opportunity to effect changes in the policy and implementation of theproject which may be desirable based upon experience under the initial operationof the project and results of monitoring and research.

VI. PRODUCTION. MARKETING AND PRICES. FARM INCOME

Agricultural ImRact

6.1 General. The improvements provided under the project would have asignificant impact on crop production and farm income over the entire commandarea. Waterlogging and soil salinity in the project area are rep'rted to beincreasing at a rapid rate (para 2.10), which would depress futut. yields.Sinee, the cost of eivil works for watercourse renovatfon is met by the Third On-Farm Water Management Project (only incremental cost of implementation isincluded in the project), the costs and benefits of watercourse renovation areexcluded. Therefore, the assumed future "without project" situation includes theeffects of OFWM improvements. Furthermore, it is assumed that future yieldswithout the project (and without OFWM) would not fall because of inereasingwaterlogging and soil salinity, which is a conservative assumption. Productioninereases "with project" would be due to both increased cropping intensity andinereased yields resulting from: (a) irrigation improvements made possible byproject works, including reliable scheduled deliveries, increased water supplythrough reduction of losses, and equitable distribution between head and tailreaches of channels; (b) control of the groundwater table due to reduced seepageto the groundwater from canals and rainfall; and (c) reduction of crop lossesfrom storm flooding through improved surface drainage.

6.2 Based on information provided by the NESPAK/HARZA feasibility reportfor the Fordwah Eastern Sadiqia (South) subsurface drainage project, t-o farmtypes have been chosen to represent the project: the small farm (3.5 ha), andthe large farm (11 ha). Small farms cover 41% of the project area, while largefarms cover 59X. Of the total number of farms in the project area (about17,900), nearly 70X are small. Based on farm data collected by the appraisal

- 34 -

mission, presented in the above feasibility report, and complemented by data fromcomparable areas elsewhere, a quantitative analysis was carried out using acomponent of the Indus Basin Model Revised.17

6.3 Croppi.na Pattern and Intensity. Table 6.1 summarizes cropped areaand cropping intensities under present, without project (with OFWH), and withproject conditions. Additional water saved due to increased delivery efficiencywould be about 91 thousand acre feet (kaf) annually, of which 42 kaf in rabi and49 kaf in kharif (see Annex 9, Table 1). This increase would result in bothremoval of water stress and increase in cropped area. Cropping intensity "withproject" on small farms would increase by about 23%, and by about 27.5% on largefarms (about 26% in the total project area). Total cropped area under the twomajor crops, cotton and wheat, would increase by about 20%.

6.4 CroR Yields and Production. The improved water supply andgroundwater control due to seepage reduction and surface drainage would result inabout 15% increase in yield of cotton, 13% of mustard, rape and sugarcane, and 4%of wheat. The yield increase of fodder crops would be nominal. The combinedeffect of increases in cropped area and yields on production is shown in Table6.2. Incremental production of cotton and wheat in the total project area (about105,000 ha cca) is 14,600 tons and 22,400 tons, respectively, at full development

Table 6.1: ESTIMATED CROPPED AREA ('000 ha) AND INTENSITIES (%)

Present Without Project/a With ProjectSmall Large Total Small Large Total Small Large TotalFarms Farms Area Farms Farms Area Farms Farms Area

Rice (IRRI) 1.7 3.1 4.8 1.8 3.2 5.0 2.1 3.8 5.9Kharif fodder 5.6 6.2 11.8 5.8 6.3 12.1 6.8 7.7 14.4Cotton 12.0 19.2 31.2 12.5 19.7 32.1 14.6 23.8 38.4Rabi fodder 4.7 5.6 10.3 4.9 5.7 10.6 5.7 6.9 12.6Mustard & rape 2.1 2.5 4.6 2.2 2.5 4.8 2.6 3.1 5.7Wheat 21.0 31.5 52.6 21.8 32.3 54.2 25.5 39.1 64.6Sugarcane 4.7 5.6 10.3 4.9 5.7 10.6 5.7 6.9 12.6TOTAL RABI 32.6 45.1 77.8 33.9 46.3 80.2 39.6 56.0 95.6TOTAL KHARIF 24.1 34.0 58.1 25.0 34.9 59.8 29.2 42.2 71.4ANNUAL 56.7 79.1 135.8 58.8 81.1 140.0 68.7 98.2 166.9Intensities

Rabi 76.0 73.0 74.2 78.9 74.9 76.5 92.1 90.6 91.2Kharif 56.0 55.0 55.4 58.1 56.4 57.1 67.9 68.3 68.1Annual 132.0 128.0 129.6 137.0 131.3 133.6 160.0 158.8 159.3

/a Future with OFWM.Note: 41% of the project area is assumed to be under small farms (3.5 ha)

and 59% under large farms (11 ha).

(about 37% and 24% over the without project situation). The production increasein areas under large farms is higher than under small farms, essentially becauseof higher input use. The total value of incremental production in constant FY92prices would be close to Rs 167 million annually (see Annex 9, Table 2), of which

17/ The Indus Basin Model Revised uses an optimization framework and with inputand output coefficients provides interaction between cropping activities, water use,and available water supply. Details on the model and its adaptation for the projectare available in the project file.

- 35 -

cotton, wheat and sugarcane would be about Rs 137 million (82%), and fodder(kharif and rabi) about Rs 21 million (13%).

Table 6.2: ESTIMATED CROP PRODUCTION ('000 tons)

Main OutRuts By-ProductsIncre-

Without With mental Without WithPresent Project Project (%) Present Project Project

Rice (IRRI) 7.6 7.8 9.3 19.4 13.7 14.1 8.4Cotton 31.7 39.0 53.6 37.3 25.4 31.2 21.4Kharif fodder 227.9 235.1 279.6 18.9Rabi fodder 277.5 286.2 346.6 21.1Mustard & rape 3.7 3.8 5.1 34.9 2.4 2.4 1.6Sugarcane 311.2 320.7 433.4 35.1 40.5 41.7 28.2Wheat 79.8 94.8 117.2 23.7 119.6 142.1 87.9

Marketing and Prices

6.5 Marketing arrangements for the farm output are described in chapterII. The project's incremental production would be relatively small and demand isexpected to rise -- in view of a fast growing population and established exportmarkets (cotton, rice) -- annual incremental output should be readily absorbed.Fodder would essentially be used on the farm.

6.6 Farmers are assumed to receive and pay fixed prices for commoditiessubject to government regulation and market prices for all others. FY92 farmgateprices used in the financial analysis are shown in Annex 9, Table 4.

Farm Income

6.7 The two farm models chosen for the project have been designed torepresent typical cropping patterns, cultivation practices, input usage, andyields. Budgets prepared for these models show an increase in net annual incomeof 39% (in constant FY92 prices) for the small and 45% for the large farm at fulldevelopment. A summary of income per farm is given in Table 6.3 and detailedbudgets are in Annex 9, Tables 2 and 3. Benefits to farmers located at the tailof minors and watercourses vould generally be greater than those accruing tofarmers located at the head. The project's impact on tenants' income would varydepending on tenancy arrangements, but income would generally be about one-halfto two-thirds of the incremental income of owner/operators.

Table 6.3: INCOME PER FARM('000 Rupees)

Without With IncrementalPresent Project Project 000 Rs

Small farms 10.52 14.17 19.68 5.51 39Large farms 20.52 39.51 57.61 18.10 46Total area 16.80 22.13 31.45 9.32 42

- 36 -

VII. BENEFITS AND JUSTIFICATION

Production and Employment

7.1 The project would raise agricultural production and incomes byimproving the irrigation system and providinp surface drainage over a commandarea of about 104,800 ha. About 17,900 farm families or about 143,000 peoplewould directly benefit. Their present annual per capita income from croppingactivities of between US$50 (small farm) and US$150 equivalent (large farm)compares with a per capita GNP of US$375 (1990 World Bank estimate). Populationin the project area is projected to double by the year 2015. Without theproject, underemployment is likely to increase. With the project, total farmlabor requirements would reach about 9 million workdays per year at fulldevelopment (2001) -- an increase of 12% over the present situation -- providingadditional employment opportunities in the area. Construction activities wouldalso generate employment during the implementation period. The project wouldcover mostly saline groundwater areas, where farm incomes are generally lowerthan in fresh groundwater areas, and would benefit farmers at the tail end ofcanals and watercourses whose incomes had been depressed because planned watersupplies did not reach their land. It would thus improve living conditions ofthe poorer section of the farming community. Involvement of women would followthe pattern traditionally associated with irrigated agriculture in Pakistan, withwomen participating in farm work but not in water management.

Other Benefits

7.2 Storm water drainage would reduce the long-term effect of inadequatedrainage on buildings, roads and utility lines, reducing the maintenance cost ofthese facilities. Surface drainage would also improve health and sanitationconditions. Provision of electrical power for the interceptor drains would alsobenefit the project area. These indirect (unquantified) benefits wouldcontribute to improving the living standard of the predominantly ruralpopulation.

7.3 The research component and Phase 2 preparation would benefit thewater sector as a whole. They would provide answers to several key questionsneeded for water sector development in the 'post water allocations' era.Research component would provide guidance in fully utilizing the availableresources in highly saline and waterlogged environment. It would also provide amodel for integrating the irrigation and agricultural activities and makeproposals for converting the surface irrigation system to a demand based system.

Economic Analysis

7.4 The economic rate of return (ERR) of the project is estimated to be22%. Economic benefits and costs given in Annex 10, Table 1 have been calculatedin constant FY92 prices. The main assumptions made in the analysis are asfollows:

(a) Project Life: Twenty six years (twenty years after the completion ofthe project), with full development reached in project year 9, threeyears after the completion of works -- the build-up of benefits wouldtake four years for each bati.h of improvements.

(b) Prices: Farmgate prices for internationally traded goods are based onWorld Bank commodity price forecasts, while those fcr non-traded goodsare based on domestic financial prices (Annex 9, Table 4). Among traded

- 37 -

goods, export parity prices have been used for cotton, rice andsugarcane, and import parity prices for wheat and fertllizers. Themarket wage for labor as well as other domestic prices and pricecomponents have been translated into border prices by applying astandard conversion factor of 0.9.

(c) Proiect Benefits: Benefits consist of the estimated incremental cropproduction described in Chapter VI.

(d) Proiect Costs: All investment costs, incremental crop production andO&M costs have been taken into account.

Sensitivity and Risks

7.5 The project's ERR of 22% has been calculated with conservativeassumption concerning farmers' future cropping patterns. The projectimprovements would allow for greater flexibility in regulation of the surfacewater supply to the area, and with more timely water supply the cropping patternis expected to shift towards more profitable crops. Assuming a 5% shift in thecropping pattern accompanied by reallocation of 5% of currently available surfacewater within each season, the ERR increases to 34%.

7.6 The sensitivity of the project to changes in benefits and costs hasbeen tested using switching values18 as a measure. A discount rate of 10% (theassumed opportunity cost of capital in Pakistan) was used. The results show thatcosts could increase by 200% or benefits reduce by 49% without making the projecteconomically unacceptable.

7.7 The project could face the risk of implementation delays due to (i)limited capacity of the local construction industry, and agencies' andcontractors' relative unfamiliarity with envisaged construction techniques (canallining with geo-membrane, interceptor drains); and (ii) shortage of localfunding. Interceptor drains, although new in Punjab, have already been installedin Sindh under LBOD. Hard surface lining has been provided in several canals inthe Indus irrigation system, including the 6-R distributary (under CWNP), whichis part of the Sadiqia canal system. Other types of membranes have been usedtogether with hard surface lining (such as asphaltic membrane in the Sidhnai-Mailsi-Bahawal link in the southeast of the project area), but geo-membrane wouldbe used for the first time in Pakistan. It is expected that with appropriatechoice of bidding procedures (ICB), careful selection of local contractors,proper specifications, design criteria, and quality control delays due to thefirst cause can be minimized. It is hoped that, as in the past, GOP and COPunjabwould give priority to the project in budget allocations, eliminating the risk ofimplementation delays due to the second cause.

7.8 Other Risks. The Federal Shariat Court of Pakistan has recently givena ruling that the Shariah does not permit the payment or award of interest andthus, has instructed the Government to modify a number of existing laws thatcurrently provide for payment of interest. The Government has filed an appealwith the Supreme Court against the Shariat Court ruling, which has been stayedpending the outcome of the appeal. As far as Pakistan's obligations under loanand credit agreements with Bank/IDA are concerned, these would be valid and

13/ Switching value is the percentage char.ge of the variable tested for vhichthe project's net present value is zero, or for which the project's rate of returnis equal to the discount rate (usually the opportunity cost of capital).

- 38 -

enforceable under international law, in accordance with the terms of thoseagreements and the general conditions of Bank/IDA, notwithstanding any local lawor judicial decision regarding the payment of interest and other charges,including any such ruling.

Environmental Issues

7.9 The proposed project has been reviewed under the provisions ofOperational Directive 4.00, Annex A, "Environmental Assessment" and placed in

environmental screening category B. The project will not require the preparationof an environmental assessment; however, designs used for project fundedactivities will be reviewed to minimize environmental impact. Typical of mostwater management projects, the project would have an overall positive impact on

the environment. It builds on existing infrastructure and improves systems

operation. Hence, it would not create adverse environmental effects normallyassociated with new development, such as resettlement, depletion of land andwater resources, and loss of wildlife habitat. Drainage of several smalltemporary ponds scattered throughou. the area, and improved water managementwould reduce deep percolation to the groundwater and offset, or delay, problems

of waterlogging and related soil salinity. Water management would also reduce

the incidence of mosquito-borne diseases by reducing the habitat of mosquitos:stagnant water seeping from deteriorated canals and unimproved watercourses.

VIII. AGREEMENTS REACHED AND RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1 Assurances were obtained during negotiations from GOP, GOPunjab andWAPDA, as appropriate, that:

(a) specifications, design criteria and quality control measures used forconstruction of interceptor and surface drains, canal lining and othercivil works would be acceptable to IDA (para 3.6);

(b) surface water supply to the project area would be adequate and operationof channels would be modified to meet crop water requirements as closelyas possible (para 3.7 );

(c) improvement of watercourses in the project area would be completed byJune 30, 1995 (para 3.9);

(d) timely completion of on-going surface drainage contracts would beensured and coordinated with the construction of surface drains under

the project (para 3.10);

(e) a draft report containing proposals for formalizing farmerorganizations, and detailed design of a demand based irrigationscheduling system would be submitted for the Bank's review by September30, 1993 and the proposed pilot programs would be implemented during theproject implementation period (para 3.19);

(f) consultants for design, and construction supervision of all componentswould be recruited, following Bank guidelines (par& 3.22);

(g) all implementing agencies in VAPDA, PID and PAD would maintain separateaccounts for the project; the accounts (including Special Accounts)would be audited annually by independent auditors acceptable to IDA; and

- 39 -

copies of audit reports, including separate opinions of the au-itors onreimbursements claimed on the basis of SOEs, and on the operation of theSpecial Accounts would be submitted vithin nine months of the end ofeach fiscal year (para 4.6);

(h) all implementing agencies would furnish annual work programs to IDA forits concurrence by March 31 for the following fiscal year starting fromFY93 (para 5.12);

(i) SMO would submit an overall monitoring and evaluation program definingprecise responsibilities of various agencies (along with draft inter-and intra-agency agreements) and providing detailed scope of work forIDA approval by December 31, 1992 (para 5.19);

(j) Punjab will discuss with IDA by February 15 of each fiscal yearbeginning with FY93, the level of funding required for operation ardmaintenance of the surface irrigation, fresh groundwater tubewells anddrainage facilities in Punjab for the following fiscal year, and basedon mutually agreed funding levels, provide adequate budgetaryallocations (para 5.21);

(k) Punjab shall, through water and/or drainage charges: (i) by July 1, 1993achieve a recovery level of at least 35% of the annual O&M cost of itssurface irrigation, fresh groundwa_.er tubewell and drainage facilities;(ii) by July 1, 1994 achieve c recovery level of at least 45% of suchcost; (iii) by July 1, 1995, achieve a recovery level of at least 55% ofsuch cost; (iv) by July 1, 1996, achieve a recovery level of at least70% of such cost; (v) by July 1, 1997, achieve a recovery level of atleast 90% of such cost; and (vi) by July 1, 1998, achieve and thereaftermaintain a recovery level of 100% of such cost (para 5.22); and

(1) a mid-term review, the terms of reference of which would be sent to IDAfor its concurrence six months prior to review, would be undertakenjointly by VAPDA, GOPunjab and IDA during the third year of theimplementation, but not latter than March 31, 1995 (para 5.26);

8.2 The following would be the conditions of effectiveness: (i) VAPDA,PID and PAD have completed the evaluation of proposals for consulting servicesand have furnished the evaluation reports to IDA (para 3.22); (ii) approval ofproject PC-1 by ECNEC (pars 4.2); and (iii) appointment of Project Directors byVAPDA and PID along with associated staff (paras 5.3 and 5.7).

8.3 With the above assurances and conditions, the proposed project wouldbe suitable for an IDA credit of SDR 39.6 million (US$54.20 million equivalent)on standard terms with 35 years maturity. The borrower would be the IslamicRepublic of Pakistan.

- 40 -

PAKISTAN Annex-1FORDWAH EASTERN SADIQIA (SOUTH) Table 1IRRIGATION AND DRAINAgE PROJECT

Physical Features

Canal Name Channel GCA CCA Number Authorized ActualType Acres Acres Water- Discharge Discharge

courses (CFS) (CFS)

Eastern Sadigia (Total) N 297,604 258,701 668 5230/6280 5900

Girdgarivala DY 4,033 3,041 9 13 15

Sirajvah (Total) DY 49,176 44,421 113 197 217Direct outlets WC 18,081 15,679 37 58 70Najibvah MR 9,793 9,475 27 39 43Bahadarwah MR 20,367 18,350 47 82 90l-R/Bahadarvah MR 935 917 2 3.6 4

Malik Branch (Total) BR 48,392 41,302 89 1538 1900Direct Outlets WC 15,739 12,465 22 47 52Bhukan DY 5,369 3,835 10 13 15Murad DY 22,402 21,002 46 595 690Haran MR 3,940 3,103 9 69 76Shadab SMR 942 897 2 3.5 6

Hakra Branch (Total) BR 196,003 169,937 457 2708 2900Direct outlets WC 22,240 19,285 45 35 42Bhaku Shah DY 1,569 1,514 3 6 71-R Sunder DY 5,123 4,990 11 19 202-R Dunga DY 6,764 5,643 14 20 24

3-R Khattan (Total) DY 81,195 70,316 186 307 368Direct outlets WC 51,365 45,334 116 168 1861-R Qazivala MR 19,552 16,779 46 66 791-L Jourkanvala MR 8,144 6,408 19 27 342-L MR 2,134 1,795 5 7 8.4

4-R Harunabad (Total) DY 49,439 44,307 129 189 218Direct outlets WC 30,064 27,609 81 117 1401-RA Labgsingh MR 6,967 6,077 16 22 281-R Badruwala MR 12,408 10,621 32 43 50

1-L Nubarak DY 18,861 14,500 44 67 805-R Bhaghsar DY 10,812 9,382 25 36 47

Total 297,604 258,701 668Total (ha) 120,530 104,774

Notes: Channel Type, N Main Canal, BR Branch Canal, DY Distributary,MR Minor, SMR Sub-Minor, WC Watercourse

- 41 -

An_ex -1Table 2

PAKISTAN

FORDWAH EASTERN SADIOIA (SOUTH)

IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

Channels with Interceptor drains

Channel Total ReachName Length Discharge Number

(feet) Capacity From To Length of Int-(CFS) RD RD (feet) ceptors

1. Sirajvaha Dy 67,500 217 0 67,500 67,500 22. Malik Branch 116,900 1,900 3,700 116,900 113,200 13. hurad Dy 122,000 690 0 116,000 116,000 13. Hakra Branch 296,000 2,900 0 165,000 165,000 24. 3-R Khattan 162,231 368 0 104,000 104,000 26. 4-R Harunabad 112,050 218 0 58,500 58,500 2

I'3tal 624.200(190.4 km)

Note: Interceptor drainage system would be installed along the Malik andHakra Branches and it would be extended to the rest of the channelsafter evaluating its performance.

- 42 -

PAKIS ", Annex ITable 3

FORDWAH EASTERN SAl.OIA (SOUTH)

IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

Channels to be lined

Channel Total ReachName Length Discharge

Capacity From To Length(Feet) CFS RD RD Feet

Eastern Sadiqia1. Girdarivala 15,750 13.0 0 15,750 15,750

Sirajwah2. Najibvaha 56,315 43.0 0 17,760 17,7603. 1-R Bahadarwah 5,500 4.0 0 5,500 5,5004. Bahadarwah MR 60,139 90.0 0 37,300 37,3005. " " 35.0 37,300 60,139 22,839

Malik Branch6. Bhukan 23,040 15.0 0 23,040 23,040

Haran7. Shadab 5,250 6.0 0 5,250 5,250

Hakra Branch8. Bhaku Shah 2,740 7.0 0 2,740 2,7409. 1-R Sunder 12,150 20.0 0 12,150 12,15010. 2-R Dunga Bunga 33,720 24.0 0 33,720 33,72011. 3-R Khatan 162,301 120.0 104,000 147,950 43,95012. n n 34.8 147,950 162,300 14,35013. 1-R Qaziwala 59,100 79.0 0 29,675 29,67514. " of 34.8 29,675 59,100 29,42515. 1-L Jourkanvala 33,900 34.0 0 33,900 33,90016. 2-L 10,000 8.4 0 10,000 10,00017. 4-R Harunabad 112,050 115.0 58,500 89,179 30,67918. n n 34.0 89,179 112,050 22,87119. 1-RA Labhsingh 22,000 28.0 0 22,000 22,00020. 1-R Badruwala 50,623 50.0 0 12,515 12,51521. n n 36.0 12,515 50,623 38,10822. 1-L Mubarak 77,750 80.0 0 48,800 48,80023. " " 34.8 48,800 77,750 28,95024. 5-R Bhaghsar 34,270 47.0 0 34,270 34,270

Total 575,542(175.5 km)

- 43 -

PAKISTA ANNEX ITable 4

FORDWAH EASTERN SADIOIA (SOUTH)

IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

Contracts for Surface Drains

Prom To Progress in percentContract Name RD RD Upto December 1991Number (feet) (feet) Financial Earth Struct-

Work ures1 SC-1 PID Outfall DR 0 79,680 76 84 712 SC-2 PID Harunabad DR 0 27,485 43 67 30

Dahranvala DR 0 37,0003 SC-3 PID Shaheed DR 0 43,692 53 64 51

Doshakh DR 0 12,0004 SC-4 PID Harunabad DR 27,458 121,412 23 43 19

5-L Harunabad DR 0 5,0005 SC-5 PID Baghsar DR 0 51,573 Design completed.

Badruwala DR 0 17,0956 SC-6 PID Baghsar DR 51,573 136,920 Design completed.7 NC-7 W Jandwala DR 0 91,000 5 9 3

Qazivala DR 0 31,9068 NC-S V Jandwala DR 91,000 201,090 3 79 NC-9 v Harunabad DR 160,161 269,642 Design in progress.

1-L Harunabad DR 0 16,68910 NC-12 U Khetran DR 0 59,576 3 11

1-L Rhetran DR 0 42,07111 NC-13 V Harunabad 121,412 160,161 Design in progress.

4-L Harunabad 0 32,2443-L Harunabad 0 20,9792-L Harunabad 0 25,995

12 SC-7 PID Work in the Evaporation Ponds Design in progress.

Total 1,031,484(314.4 km)

- 44 -

P-AXISTAN Table 5

FORDWAH EASTERN SADIOIA (SQUTH)

IRRIGATION ANTD DRAINAGE PROJECT

Planned drains

Contract Name of the Drain From ToNumber RD RD

(feet) (feet)1 SC-1 PID Outfall DR 0 79,6802 SC-2 PID Harunabad DR 0 27,458SC-4 PID Harunabad DR 27,458 121,412NC-13 Harunabad DR 121,412 160,161NC-9 Harunabad DR 160,161 269,642

3 SC-4 PID 5-L Harunabad DR 0 5,0004 NC-13 4-L Harunabad 0 32,2445 NC-13 3-L Harunabad 0 20,9796 NC-13 2-L Harunabad 0 25,9957 NC-9 1-L Harunabad DR 0 16,6898 SC-2 PID Dahranwala DR 0 37,0009 SC-3 PID Shaheed DR 0 43,69210 SC-3 PID Doshakh DR 0 12,00011 SC-5 PID Baghsar DR 0 51,573

SC-6 PID Baghsar DR 51,573 136,92012 SC-5 PID Badruwala DR 0 17,09513 NC-7 W Jandwala DR 0 91,000

NC-8 W Jandwala DR 91,000 201,09014 NC-7 V Qazivala DR 0 31,90615 NC-12 V Rhetran DR 0 59,57616 NC-12 V 1-L Khetran DR 0 42,071

Total 1,031,484(314.4 km)

Additional Drains

Drain Length Outfall DrainName (Feet) Drain Name At RD

1 AD-1 10,000 Jandwala Drain 201,0902 AD-2 9,354 Jandwala Drain 9,3503 AD-3 10,450 Jandwala Drain 90,0004 AD-4 10,890 Jandwala Drain 67,5005 AD-5 19,580 Jandwala Drain 40,0006 AD-6 30,360 Jandwala Drain 42,0007 AD-7 7,000 1L- Haroonabad Drain 16,6898 AD-8 15,340 Baghsar Drain 135,0009 AD-9 9,750 3L-Ha-oonabad Drain 20,000Total 122,724

(37.4 km)

- 45 -

Annex ITable 6

PAKISTAN

FORDWAH EASTERN SADIUIA (SOUTH)

IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

Cost Estimate for Surface drains

CostContract Drain From To MillionNumber Name RD RD Rupees

Prices

1 SC-5 PID Baghsar DR 0 51,573 20.7Badruwala DR 0 17,095

2 SC-6 PID Baghsar DR 51,573 136,920 25.83 NC-9 V Harunabad DR 160,161 269,642 32.4

1-L Harunabad DR 0 16,6894 NC-13 V Harunabad 121,412 160,161 50.9

4-L Harunabad 0 32,2443-L Harunabad 0 20,9792-L Harunabad 0 25,995

5 SC-7 PID Work in Evaporation 12.0Ponds

Sub-Total 398,152 141.8(121.4 km)

6 Ad-i to Ad-9 Additional drains 122,724 17.0(37.4 km)

Total 158.8

- 46 -

PAKISTAN Annex 2FORDWAH EASTERN SADIOIA (SOUTH) Page 1IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

Subsurface Drainage Field Trial Details

1. The drainage field trials to be installed during the first phaseof the project are designed to test subsurface drainage parameters andgeotextile filter material for use as a protective envelope around pipe. Themain subsurface drainage parameters requiring field testing are drainagecoefficients, drain spacing and drain depth. This tes_'ng can be completed ina relative short period (2 - 3 years). The establishment of the agriculturalresponses to improved drainage (crop yield, cropping patterns, economicreturn, etc.) will take more time. It is, however, recommended that theselong-term objectives are taken into account in the site selection and designof the test areas.

2. The field trial research will be entrusted to the InternationalWaterlogging and Salinity Resec.rch Institute (IWASRI). Overall implementationarrangements for this component are given in Chapter V. IWASRI has alreadyengaged two international consultants to assist with the site selection andformulation of the research program. About three to six test sites would beselected, ranging in size from 60 ha to 405 ha. These sites, located inpresently waterlogged and salinized areas, adequately cover the variation inthe prevailing soil and (geo) hydrological conditions of the project area.

3. Layout of the drainage field trial areas also involvesconsideration of the in-situ hydraulic conductivity and other considerationsto evaluate the cost and effectiveness relationships involving installation,operation and maintenance. Thus, the test fields will involve layinghorizontal pipe drains at an average depth of 1.7 m (5.5 feet), and 2.4 m (8.0feet). Drain spacing was calculated using Ernst's Equation for layered soilsand resulted in test area spacings that will range from 80 m (250 feet) to 30Cm (1000 feet) depending on soil parameters and drain depth. The testing ofdrain spacings will involve three different variables which are the calculateddrain spacing, one half of the calculated spacing and twice the calculatedspacing. An appropriate buffer zone is necessary between each layout pattern.Drain lengths are generally at least four time the drain spacing and have tworeplications to properly test the parameters. River-run gravel envelopematerial which has proved to be effective under the project conditions is tobe used for testing the drainage parameters in these primary test fields.

4. Since cost of the river-run gravel envelope is extremely high, alower cost envelope is to be field tested for this project and for potentialuse in other regions. Laboratory tests have been performed and indicate thata composite envelope consisting of a synthetic fabric (geotextile filter)material wrapped around the horizontal pipe drain which is surrounded by localsand will protect the drains from sediment deposition. Thus, at each testsite comparisons will be made between the performance of different types ofpipe envelope (gravel envelope, geotextile and

- 47 -

Annex 2Page 2

sand envelope and plain geotextile envelope). These envelope tests will beo..ce in the standard spacine blocks of the trial areas. Extra drain lines

will be provided in these blocks for this envelope testing to avoidinteraction with the drain depth/spacing testing. At some locations, envelopetesting will also be done on the interception pipe drains which are planned tobe installed along the branch irrigation canals.

5. Pipe sizes for the field trial areas have been calculated usingacceptable professional engineering standards. The gradient for the lateralshas been selected as 0.001 while for collectors a gradient of 0.005 has beenadopted. Manholes are to be provided for discharge measurements and for otherobservations such as sediment deposition as well as routine maintenance.Observation wells are provided for measuring water table fluctuations. The

arrangement of observation wells is based on the recommendations given in FAOpaper 28 "Drainage Testing". Sumps will be provided for collecting water fromthe test areas and disposal into nearby canals where appropriate.

6. Observations will be made to evaluate the performance of all trialareas. Variation of water table during the irrigation and rainfall seasons,impact on salt balance in the root zone, impact on crop production and otheritems that could impact drainage design and layout will be measured. Thetrials will provide the basis for subsurface drainage research needed toprepare the design of phase 2 properly. It would result in a great deal of

transferable research on drainage design criteria, suitable depths for drainpipe, improved construction methods for pipe drains, and how better advantagecan be taken of water tables for subirrigating crops to supplement crop waterneeds.

7. Since experiences at other drainage projects in the country haveshown that the design and performance of subsurface drainage systems is muchinfluenced by the regional groundwater regime, a regional groundwaterbalance/flow model would be developed. This model would be used for the: ti)

interpretation and evaluation of the observations on the trial areas; (ii)evaluation of the effects of the planned anti-canal seepage measures(interception drainage and lining) and of the planned surface drainageimprovement measures, all of which measures would effect the groundwaterbalance; and (iii) analysis of the potential seepage hazard posed by theplanned evaporation ponds and disposal of sub-surface drainage effluent from

phase 2.

8. The findings of the research would be applicable in the design of

sub-surface drainage projects in the whole basin and would add to theinternational knowledge in the drainage field. Almost all of this adaptiveresearch work is included in a new research effort recommended by theInternational Program for Technology Research in Irrigation and Drainage(IPTRID) and will help improve the quality and cost effectiveness of future

similar projects in Pakistan.

- 48 -

PAKISTAN Annex 3Page 1

FORDWAH EASTERN SADIOIA (SOUTH)

IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

Monitoring of Land and Water Conditions

1. The proposed project would implement a number of waterconservation measures which will reduce the recharge to the groundwater.These measures are interceptor drains along the branch cenals, lining ofdistributaries and minors, watercourse improvements and surface drains. Theimpact of these measures on the groundwater table is difficult to quantifyprecisely in advance. Therefore, a program to monitor the Land and Waterconditions in the project area to assess the impact of the proposed measuresis included in the project. Assessment of the effects and performance ofthese measures is of considerable importance both to quantify the projectimpact and to assess the subsurface drainage requirements for Phase 2. Themonitoring program would also provide useful information for planning anddesign of other waterlogging and salinity control projects in the country.

2. Although the main objective of the monitoring program is tomonitor the combined effect of all the measures, to the extent possible, theperformance of each measure would also be monitored separately. It isanticipated that the latter monitoring will provide sufficient information onthe a technical functioning to improve the design of new projects.

3. The main components of the monitoring program are generalmonitoring, specific monitoring and monitoring of sub-surface field trials.General monitoring would cover the whole project area and monitor thegroundwater levels, groundwater quality, soil salinity, and water inflows andoutflows in order to prepare a water balance for the area. The Specificmonitoring would be aimed at assessing the performance of individual componentof the project. Monitoring of field trails (described in Annex 2) wouldprovide data required to develop the design parameters for tile drainage.

General Monitoring

4. Groundwater Moinitoring The groundwater monitoring is a majorcomponent of the monitoring program in which a network of observation wellswould be installed. The alignment, coverage, and density of this networkwould be designed to provide an adequate, reliable quantitative evaluation ofthe impact of the implemented water conservation measures on the watertableand on the groundwater quality. The same network will also be used to developthe groundwater model referred in Annex 2.

5. The SNO which has ample experience with this type of monitoringwould be responsible for the detailed design of the groundwater observationnetwork. The network would be aligned along the groundwater

- 49 -

Annex 3Page 2

contours with higher densities perpendicular to the contours and lowerintensities parallel to the contours. The coverage should be in line with thecoverage of the water conservation measures. Generally the network will havea 1-2 km grid.

6. At the grid points regular observations on watertable depth andgroundwater salinity will be made. Observation timings and frequency againshould be guided by SMO experiences, but it is expected that two observationsper year (pre-monsoon and end-monsoon) will suffice. The observations will bemade in standard wells. All watertable reading will be converted to reducedlevels to allow the preparation of watertable contour maps. The groundwatersalinity will be measured on samples taken from these wells. Before sampling,the wells should be pumped to assure that the salinity of the well waterreflects the salinity of the surrounding groundwater.

7. Soil SalinitX The the soil salinity monitoring will also, asmuch as possible, follow the standard SMO procedures. The requiredinformation density is expected to be of the order of one location per 5-10 hawith samples taken at two depths (10 cm and 30 cm below soil surface).Analyses of the samples on EC and SAR, both in a 1:1 soil/water ratio, wouldsuffice. It is further suggested that the soil salinity sampling be donetwice per year at the pre-monsoon and post-monsoon timing also selected forthe groundwater monitoring. The procedures and technology provided under theImproved Technology for Planning and Monitoring component (to carry outsalinity mapping at a high speed) would be used to the extent possible.

8. In addition to the conventional monitoring based on fieldobservations and field sampling, possibilities for use of modern remotesensing technology to assess the impact of the water conservation measureswould also be explored.

9. The monitoring should preferably start at least one year prior toimplementation of the water conservation measures. The pre-implementationconditions would establish a reference base (baseline) against which theimpacts of the implemented measures can be assessed. The implementation islikely to take a number of years. The actual implementation of the differentmeasures should be carefully recorded as it constitutes important informationto be used in the evaluation of the collected data.

10. The collected data would be processed, analyzed and reportedwithin three months after observation date. The observed data should bereported in tabular form as well as in mapped form (watertable depth,groundwater contour, groundwater salinity and soil salinity). A map scale inthe order of 1:50,000 would be suitable.

11. Hydroloeical Monitoring To prepare the water balance data on allthe inflows and outflows to the area such as, rainfall, evaporation, canalwater diversions, estimates of tubewell pumpage, reuse of water from surfacedrains would be collected. Data on most of these parameters is being

- 50 -

Annex 3Page 3

collected by the implementing agencies. Therefore, this effort is essentiallyto gather the data bring in a format useable for the water balance studies aswell as for the development of groundwater model.

Specific Monitoring

12. The specific monitoring will be designed to evaluate the technicalperformance of the different specific measures. This monitoring would be atspecific locations only and restricted to the interception, lining and surfacedrainage measures. The watercourse improvements have been evaluated in anumber of other projects.

13. The performance of the interception drains will be evaluated onthe basis of: (i) watertable levels in observation lines across the canals anddrains; (ii) the intercepted seepage flows as measured in the pumped sumps;and (iii) the salinity of the intercepted water. About five such cross-sectional observation stations will be established. The performance of liningwill be evaluated by the "inflow and outflow method" on about lOX of the linedcanals. These measurements would be repeated one and two years after theconstruction of the lining. These activities would be coordinated with theresearch component on Performance of Canal lining. To monitor the surfacedrains, gaging stations will be installed on a number of surface drains at theoutfall points. Rating curves will be established for each station and asufficient number of discharge events will be recorded to evaluate capacityrequirements. The drains would be monitored for the water quality, extent ofscouring and silting, as well as weed growth. Special monitoring would alsobe carried out in the areas adjacent to the evaporation ponds. Watertableelevations and groundwater quality surrounding the ponds would be monitored toassess the impact of ponding on the adjacent lands.

Monitoring of the Field Trials for Subsurface Drainage Research

14. The field trials would require an intensive monitoring programdesigned specifically to collect data to estimate the drainage parameters asdescribed in Annex 2. Details of this program and the frequency ofobservations would be determined after the completion of detailed design ofthe field trials. Furthermore, adjustments would made in the collectionprocedures and frequency as required during the course of the researchprogram. The monitoring will be coordinated with the activities under theIrrigation and Drainage research component.

- 51 -

PAKISTAN Annex 4Page 1

FORDWAH E&STERN $ADIOIA (SOUTH)IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

Irrigation and Drainage Research

1. The research component consists of the following fivesubcomponents: (i) evaluation of the impact of waterlogging and salinity oncrop production; (ii) introduction of improved technology for planning andmonitoring irrigation and drainage projects, and land and water conditions ingeneral; (iii) assessing perfozmance of different types of canal lining; (iv)improvement of irrigation management with a view to match irrigation supplywith crop water demand i.e integrated irrigated agriculture management; and(v) Agriculture extension support. The four themes of research should be seenas organically linked and close interaction will be maintained for theexchange of data and results. The extension component would focus on thespecific needs of the project area and would be instrumental in widerapplication of the results of waterlogging and salinity research.

(i) Impact of Waterlogging and Salinity on Crop Production.

2. Degradation of soil and water resources due to vaterlogging and salinityis increasing. Current efforts to intensify agricultural production andincrease yields per unit area have to include innovative methods ofcontrolling and reversing the present trends of salinization and waterloggingin the project area. In order to understand the cause and effect relationshipof this twin menace to crop production more precisely and to improve the basisfor preparation of policies and projects in similar areas, research activities--mainly through research in farmers' fields-- would aim at attaining thefollowing objectives:

(a) to quantify the interactions among irrigation and agronomicpractices that significantly affect farmers' yields under actualfarm conditions; in particular, the individual and combined impactof waterlogging and salinity on the yields of major crops will bedetermined;

(b) to determine the optimal levels of irrigation of the existingcropping pattern;

(c) to propose adjustments in the cropping pattern to suitwaterlogging and salinity conditions, salinity resistantvarieties, and saline agriculture;

(d) to determine the potential for use of marginally fresh and salinewater, including drainage water from the proposed drainage schemeof the overall project, for crop irrigation.

3. Field trial sites for subsurface drainage would be used wherecontrol over varying water table depths, salt levels and controlled/measuredirrigation applications and other cropping activities is required.

(ii) Improved Technolomv for Monitoring and Planning.

4. To enhance the Government's monitoring and planning capabilities,

- 52 -

Annex 4Page 2

the project would test and adapt modern technology in data collection,storage, and analysis with respect to:

(a) intensively measuring, monitoring and mapping soil salinity inrelation to other factors (depth of groundwater, depth in rootzone, irrigation practices, soil characteristics, drainage layout,etc.);

(b) preparing of a computerized data storage and analysis systemthrough the adaptation of an appropriate geographic informationsystem (GIS). This system will be used for the localizedassessment of crop production constraints, management needs,adequacy of drainage systems, drainage needs by location, andirrigation infiltration uniformity, etc.; and

(c) collecting "feedback" information of soil, crop, and watercharacteristic as needed to plan, schedule, and controlirrigation/drainage and to maximize water-use efficiency and cropyield while minimizing drainage and associated disposal problems.

(iii) Performance of Different Topes of Lining.

5. The lining of canals has been practiced in Pakistan since the1930s. There has been, however, no thorough evaluation of past and presentexperience in lining. The Punjab Irrigation Institute is currently conductinglaboratory and field research on the use of membrane materials for lining.This research, however, is limited in scope.

6. The performance of different types of canal lining currentlyemployed in Pakistan with respect to seepage control, longevity, kydraulicperformance and sedimentation would be evaluated. Studies would be undertakento select the appropriate types of canal lining for seepage control and theirmethod of installation in canals under continuous operation except shortdurations of closure for annual maintenance. This would require evaluatingthe performance of lined canals in Pakistan and other regional countriesfollowing comparable construction practices as well as an internationalliterature search to identify types of canal lining appropriate for adaptationto the local availability of materials, construction practices and qualitycontrol standards. Selected methods of lining would be tested on a pilotscale by field installation in representative sections of main canal,distributaries and watercourses. The study would lead to drawing up technicalspecifications for the recommended type(s) of lining and their method ofinstallation for minimal interruption of irrigation supply, supported bydesign parameters. costs and economic evaluation for application to fresh andsaline groundwater areas respectively.

(iv) Integrated Irrigated Agriculture Management.

7. Integration of irrigation and agriculture is essential forrealizing the full benefits of the investment in irrigation. A pilot projectcovering two distributaries within the project area would be undertaken totest hov the operation of the existing irrigation system could be converted

- 53 -

Annex 4Page 3

to a "demand based" and how the farmers groups can participate in thedecision making. The objective is to develop and implement pilot programsaimed to test the structural, organizational, and institutional arrangementsrequired to supply water to the crops as and when required and to bringfarmers and farmer groups into the management and maintenance of theirrigation system.

8. Under the Command Water Management (CWM) Project (Cr. 1487-PAK) agood start has been made in improving management of irrigated agriculture inselected canal commands by improving cooperation between the ProvincialAgriculture (PAD) and Irrigation (PID) Departments and involving farmers indecision making'. This research component would build upon this experienceand provide answers to critical questions relevant to irrigated agriculture.The main thrust of the research would be on developing replicable models for(i) strengthening and formalizing farmer institutions (e.g. WUAs federationsand canal committees); (ii) providing farmer institutions a stronger voice indecision making and a formal role in operation and maintenance of theirrigation system, and developing a frame work for addressing legal and socialconstraints in this regard; (iii) improving scheduling of water deliveries tobetter match crop requirements by introducing, structural, operational andmanagement improvements; and (iv) introducing appropriate site specificcropping patterns, cultural practices and input management.

9. The canal supplies to the project area are short in some months,and surplus water is supplied in others. Because the area is in the commandof Mangla reservoir the water diversions could be regulated to a great extentto suit the irrigation demand provided an appropriate decision making systemis in place. With the provision of increased canal capacity and bettercontrol through lining and improved control structures, it should be possibleto operate the channels according to the fluctuations in water demand.

10. To study the feasibility of modern irrigation scheduling andiistribut:on, two distributaries would be selected. Since farmer involvementis a prerequisite for preparing appropriate designs, and subsequent operation,of a "demand based" distribution system, the research would initially focus onstrengthening farmer institutions and preparing a frame work for assigningthem a formal role in O&M. An interdisciplinary team of staff assigned fromthe Directorate of CWM would carry out diagnostic surveys in the command areasof the selected distributaries to identify physical, agronomic, social, legaland operational constraints to improving irrigated agriculture, incollaboration with PID, OPWN, and WAPDA staff, and farmers.

11. The following information, inter alia, would be collected andanalyzed: (i) reservoir operations; (ii) diversions into the main canals andbranches supplying the selected distributaries; (iii) cropped area; (iv) soelsalinity; (v) crop water and leaching requirements; (vi) expected salt

I/ Under the CWMP experience has been gained in: establishinginformal federations of VUAs; involving farmers in monitoring equity of waterdeliveries; adjusting cropping patterns according to available water supplies;introducing simple water scheduling and water management technlques; andpromoting farmer involvement in improving availability of inputs (e.g seedmultiplicatlon programs).

- 54 -

Annex 4Page 4

movement due to subirrigation; (vii) other important factors in the soil-water-plant relationship; and (viii) physical, operational, legal, and socialconstraints to meeting irrigation and leaching requirements. TechnicalAssistance would be provided both for institutional development andengineering and agronomic aspects. Based on the findings of the diagnosticanalysis, and other related studies (e.g. the proposed studies on Institutionsand on "Reducing Government Liability") plans would be prepared forintegrating irrigation and agriculture. The Directorate of CWM. inassociation with the PID. would submit a draft report containing proposals forformalizing farmers organizations. and conceptual design of a demand basedsystem for the Bank's review bX September 30. 1993. The report would, interalia: (i) review existing legislation, including, WUAs Ordinance/Act and theCanal and Drainage Act, and formulate amendments or new legal instruments toformalize farmer institutions and define their role in O&M; (ii) proposedesigns of canals, structures, and watercourse works, and operational plansfor a demand based irrigation system; and (iii) present proposals for farmerinvolvement in various activities, including operation of interceptor drainsumps, seed multiplication programs, and establishment of community centersand demonstrations for transfer of technology.

12. Implementation of civil works (physical and structuralimprovements) would be undertaken by the PID and OFWM after the farmerorganizations have been established and their roles in implementation and O&Mfully defined. Given the research nature of this activity, continuousconsultations with the beneficiaries would be essential during all stages ofdesign preparation as well as implementation and operation. A flexibleapproach to implementation wouild be necessary to incorporate farmers' views.Research findings and results from the operation of the demand based systemwould be incorporated in the operation of other channels in the project area.

(v) Agricultural Extension SuRport.

13. The extension component of the research would focus on thespecific needs of the project area. In addition to the regular extensionprogram, information on land reclamation techniques, water management,cultural practices to improve cropping under waterlogging and salinityconditions, salt resistant varieties and crops would be provided to farmers.The extension agency would gather information on these aspects from researchcarried out under the project and from other experimental stations inPakistan. Field trial sites for subsurface drainage would be used asdemonstration plots and additional plots would be installed as required.Extension service staff would collaborate closely with the OFWN irrigationagronomy teams. Details of the function of extension service are given inchapter V.

- 55 -

PISTAN Ax 5Pase 1

FORDWAI EASTERN SADIOIA (SOUTH)

IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

List of EauimnentBase Cost (Rs 000)

Item Uhit Number Uuit TotalCost Cost

A. Interceptor drains ad Surface drains

Survey Eauinment

1 Theodolite No. 5 279.84 1,399.202 Level with Stand No. 7 22.35 156.453 Survey Support Set No. 14 11.17 156.364 Diatomat No. 2 316.21 632.42

Sub-total 2,344.45

Office Eauiument and Furniture

5 Type Writers No. 1 11.18 11.186 Amonia Printing machine No. 1 121.20 121.207 Plain Paper Copier No. 2 168.27 336.548 Computer with Printer No. 7 70.00 490.009 Scientific Calculators No. 10 0.93 9.30

10 Air conditioners No. 8 20.20 161.6011 Drawing Instruments Lump Sum 101.0012 Office Furniture & fixtures Lump Sum 500.00

Sub-total 1,730.82

Machinerv for Operation and Maintenance

13 Tube Clearing Machinery No. 2 143.6 287.2014 Service truck 4-wheel drive No. 1 723.7 723.7015 Crane 10 ton No. 1 359.3 359.3016 Fork lift/Teleporter No. 1 119.8 119.80

Sub-total 1,490.00

Transport

17 4-Wheel Drive 2 door No. 5 600.0 3,000.0018 4-Wheel Drive 1000 cc No. 15 218.3 3,274.5019 Car 1000 cc No. 2 216.0 432.0020 Pick up No. 2 546.0 1,092.0021 Community van No. 1 600.0 600.00

Sub-total 8,398.50

Total 13.963.77

B. Canal Lining

Surveving Eauiiment

1 Levels with stand No. 18 40.0 720.02 Leveling stands No. 36 1.5 54.03 Plane tables No. 6 1.0 6.04 Telescopic Alidad No. 6 2.0 12.05 Magnetic compass No. 6 .7 4.26 Binoculars No. 2 1.5 3.07 Invar steel tapes No. 18 .4 7.2

Sub-total 806.4

- 56 -

EpWAB EASTERt SADIOZA (e9UTH) Pae 2IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

List of EmuimnentBase Cost (Re 000)

Item Unit Number Unit TotalCost Cost

Flow Measuramant & umiment

8 Fibre glass boat with oars No. 2 40.0 80.09 Life Bouys No. 8 .5 4.0

10 Current Meters No. 2 100.0 200.011 Wire rope 1/4 and 1/8 Rft 200 .025 5.012 Rack and Pinion for

hauling weights Set 2 20.0 40.013 Meter flumes for water

courses (parschel/cut throat) Set 6 5.0 30.014 VeLocity rods Set 6 1.0 6.015 Eaho Sounders Set 2 100.0 200.016 Sounding rods Set 4 .5 2.017 Stop watch No. 6 .7 4.2

Sub-total 571.2

Transport,

18 Car No. 1 600.0 600.019 Large 4 x 4 Vehicle No. 1 500.0 500.020 Jeeps No. 8 250.0 2,000.021 Pick-up small No. 6 130.0 780.0

Sub-total 3,880.0

Office eauinment

22 Fax Machine No. 2 30.0 60.023 Type Writers/Computers No. 12 30.0 360.024 Photo Copier Machine No. 4 75.0 300.0

Sub Total 720.0

Total 53977.0

C. OF4M

Survevina and Precision Land Level.'3 eautiment (New)

1 Laser Levelling Equipment No. 1 1,000 1,000

Office Eauiunent

2 Plain Paper Copier No. 1 100 1003 Computer with Printer No. 1 100 100

including Soft-ware4 A/C for Computers No. 1 25 25

Sub-total 225

Transport (Replacement)

5 Field Jeep 4WD (Medium Size) No. 1 600 6006 Jeep 4WD. (SmaUl Size) No. 2 250 5007 Motorcycle No. 10 30 3008 Bicycle No. 15 1.5 23

Sub-total 1,423Total LAME

- 57 -

PAX3SUM Amex SFORDWAB EASTEtN SADIOZA (SOUTH) Page 3IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PREMCT

List of EcuigmgptBase Cost (Rs 000)

D. Phase 2 Proveration and MonitorinA

Field Trials for Sub-surface Drainage

Item Unit Number Unit Total By ByCost Cost IWASRI Project

Surveying, Flow, water levelsjnd galinity Measurement

1 Weirs & Gauges No. 60 0.7 42.0 12.0 30.02 Data Loggers No. 36 29.3 1,055.0 306.0 749.03 Computers,Printers & Plotters 3 146.6 440.0 127.5 312.54 Weather Stations No. 2 234.6 469.2 127.5 341.7S Dumpy Levels No. 1 46.0 46.0 5.0 41.06 Staff Rods No. 2 1.2 2.4 2.47 Observation Wells No. 1,148 0.4 459.2 5.0 454.28 Neutron Prob No. 2 88.0 176.0 127.5 48.59 Neutron Access Tubes No. 12 0.6 7.2 2.0 5.2

10 Tensiometer No. 6 22.0 132.0 38.2 93.811 Water Level Recorders No. 4 64.5 258.0 127.5 130.512 Salinity Measurements Lump sum 255.0 76.5 178.513 Potentiometer Lump sum 30.0 10.0 20.014 Water stage recorder No. 4 150.0 600.0 600.015 Photo copier No. 1 80.0 80.0 80.0

Sub-total 3,087.3

Transport

16 Pick up Large No. 1 500 500.0 500.017 Pick up Small No. 2 250 500.0 500.0

Total 3,372.0 964.7 4,087.3

E. Irrigation and Drainage Research

Agricultural Extension Support

1 Fabricated Cinema Van with No. 1 1,000 1,000Audio Video accessories(TV Monitor 26 inches,Video cassette Recorder,Public Address system& generator)

2 Slide Projector No. 1 12 123 Overhead Projector No. 1 10 104 Still Camera 35 mm (SLR) No. 1 20 205 Photo copying machine No. 1 140 1406Typo writer No. 1 15 15

Sub-total 1,197

- 58 -

PAKISTAN Annex 5Paso 4

FORDWAH EASTERN SADIOIA (SOUTH)

IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

List of EauirmcntBame Cost (Rs 000)

Item Unit Number By By Unit TotalCWMP Project Cost Cost

Integrated Irriaated Agrioulture ManaRgement

Flow Measurement/Field Eciunment

7 Water Level Recorders No. 8 8 40 3208 Current Meters No. 4 2 2 145 2909 Broad Crested Weir Flumes No. 10 10 3 3010 Audio Video Equipment No. 1 1 200 20011 Farm implements and water

application equipment Lump sum 600

Sub-total 1,440

Office Eauiument

12 Computers No. 2 213 Lap Top computers No. 8 8 25 20014 Computer Software Lump sum 5015 Furniture Lump sum 20016 Fax Machines No. 2 2 30 60

Sub-Total 510

Transport

17 Vehicles No. 11 3 8 200 1,60018 Motorcycles No. 7 7

Sub-total 1, 600

Total 4.747

Total (Eauirment) 31.423.67

- 59 -

PAKISTAN Anex 6

Fordwah Eastern Sadiqia(South) Table IIrrigation & Drainage Project

Rupees (Million)

Projeot Components by Year

Base Costs Total----------------------------------------------------------------- __-------

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 Rs (m) U3$ (m)

A. Interoeptor Drains 36.35 88.15 109.73 108.75 108.75 108.75 560.49 21.98

B. Canal Lining 29.29 73.33 92.84 92.24 92.24 92.24 472.16 18.52

C. On Farm Water Manageent 6.98 7.24 6.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.40 0.80

D. Surface Drains 12.02 28.20 35.22 34.80 34.80 34.80 179.86 7.05

E. Monitoring & Phase 2 Prep 2.53 25.86 24.93 22.46 3.60 3.60 82.79 3.25

F. Irrigation Drainage Res. 7.68 24.07 21.19 20.60 22.60 22.60 118.74 4.66

G. Monitoring & Evaluation 0.00 0.50 1.00 2.10 2.10 2.10 7.80 0.31

B. Tachnioal Asaist. a Trng. 0.80 4.50 3.70 4.00 4.00 3.00 20.00 0.78

I. Future Proj. Preparation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 12.50 12.50 25.50 1.00

Total BA8ELINE COSTS 95.65 251.65 294.80 285.45 280.59 279.59 1487.74 58.34

Physical Contingencies 4.91 16.35 21.32 21.17 19.63 19.63 103.00 4.04

Price Contingencies 4.57 24.85 50.04 69.85 90.50 113.57 353.38 8.27----------------------------------------------------------------- __-------

Total PROJECT COSTS 105.12 292.85 366.16 376.47 390.73 412.79 1944.12 70.65

Taxes 14.29 35.39 38.54 38.65 39.57 41.87 208.30 7.59

Foreign Exchange 26.94 74.35 88.53 90.53 93.83 99.32 473.49 17.22----------------------------- _----------------------------------__-----------__--------------------------

PAKISTAN Table 2Fordwah Eastern Sadiqia(South)Irrigation & Drainage Project

Rupees (Million)

Summary Accounts by Year

Base Costs-- _------------------------_--------------------------------------__---

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 Total

I. INVESTMT COSTS___________________

A. Civil Works 54.10 182.57 237.54 235.68 216.42 216.42 1142.73

B. Consulting Services 13.56 20.33 20.84 19.64 31.44 31.44 137.23

C. Administration & Opn. Exp 16.04 32.44 33.26 30.14 32.74 31.74 176.36

D. Equipment 5.56 8.16 1.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.13

E. Vehicles 6.38 8.15 1.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.30_______________________________________________________________________

Total BASELINE COSTS 95.65 251.65 294.80 285.45 280.56 279.59 1487.74

Physical Contingenctes 4.91 16.35 21.32 21.17 19.63 19.63 103.00

Prico Contingencies 4.57 24.85 50.04 69.85 90.50 113.57 353.38-- _---------------------------------------------------_--------__------

Total PROJECT COSTS 105.12 292.85 366.16 376.47 390.73 412.79 1944.12

Taxes 14.29 35.39 38.54 38.65 39.57 41.87 208.30

Foreign Exchange 26.94 74.35 88.53 90.53 93.83 99.32 473.49-------- _------------------------_------------------------------__-----------__-----------------------

PAKISTAN Annex 6Fordwah Eastern Sadiqla(South) Table 3Irrigation & Drainage Project

Summary Account by Project ComponentRupees (Million)

On Farm Moltori Irrigati Monitorl Tecbnica FutureIntercep Water us & on nu & 1 Proj.

tor Canal Manageme Surface Phase 2 Drainage Evaluati Assist. PreparatDrains Lining nt Drains Prep Ren. on & Trng. ion

1. INVESTMENT COSTS____________________

A. CiviL Works 496.29 420.14 0.00 158.80 60.50 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00B. Consulting Services 37.16 26.50 2.70 11.87 3.80 20.00 0.00 11.20 24.00C. Adnniastratimn & Opo. Exp 17.27 19.54 15.05 5.00 14.40 86.99 7.80 8.80 1.50D. Equiprent 3.89 2.10 1.22 1.67 3.09 3.15 0.00 0.00 0.00E. Vehicles 5.88 3.88 1.42 2.52 1.00 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total BASELIRE COSTS 560.49 472.16 20.40 179.86 82.79 118.74 7.80 20.00 25.50 0%Physical Contingencies 39.70 42.01 0.00 15.88 4.84 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0Price Contingencies 135.15 116.29 1.97 44.01 14.78 26.15 2.11 4.29 8.63 1

----------------------------------------------------- _----------------__-----__------------

Total PROJECT COSTS 735.34 630.47 22.37 239.75 102.40 145.45 9.91 24.29 34.13

Taxes 89.32 75.02 1.65 18.83 11.50 5.85 J.00 2.17 3.96Foraign Exchange 205.50 156.46 2.77 39.48 29.49 17.94 0.00 7.19 14.67

-------------------------- _---------------------------------------__---------__--------------------------------------------

- 61 -

PAKISTAN Anex 6Pordwah Eastern Sadiqi&(South) Table 4Irrigation & Drainage ProjectProjects Components by Year

Totals Inoluding ContingenciesRupees (Million)

------------------------------------------------------------ __--

1993 1994 1995 199S 1997 1998 Total

A. Interceptor Drains 40.08 102.83 136.30 143.28 151.87 160.99 735.348. Canal Lining 32.81 87.03 117.27 123.56 130.97 138.83 630.47C. On Farm Water Management 7.29 7.91 7.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.37D. Surface Drains 13.39 33.42 44.48 46.63 49.43 52.40 239.75E. Monitoring & Phase 2 Prep 2.65 29.80 30.83 29.47 4.69 4.97 102.40F. Irrigation Drainage Res. (Total) 8.05 26.40 24.68 25.43 29.56 31.33 145.45

Impact of Waterlosging andsalinity 1.99 9.72 10.19 10.80 11.45 12.14 56.30

Improved Technology for Planningand Monitoring 1.78 4.70 4.05 4.30 5.85 6.21 26.89

Peformance of Canal Lining 1.78 4.70 4.05 4.30 5.85 6.21 26.89Integrated Irrigated Agriculture

Management 2.41 5.64 5.92 5.54 5.87 6.22 31.60Agriculture Extension 0.10 1.64 0.46 0.49 0.52 0.55 3.76

G. Monitoring & Evaluation 0.00 0.55 1.16 2.58 2.73 2.90 9.91H. Technical Assist. & Trns. 0.84 4.92 4.29 4.91 5.21 4.14 24.29I. Future Proj. Preparation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.61 16.27 17.24 34.13

Total PROJECTS COSTS 105.12 292.85 366.16 376.47 390.73 412.79 1944.12

Table 5PAKISTAN

Forduah Eastern Sadiqia(South)Irrigation & Drainage ProjectProjects Components by Year

Totals Including ContingenciesUS$ (million)

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 Total

A. Interceptor Drains 1.54 3.89 5.05 5.20 5.40 5.61 26.70B. Canal Lining 1.28 3.29 4.35 4.49 4.66 4.84 22.89C. On Farm Water Management 0.28 0.30 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85D. Surface Drains 0.52 1.28 1.65 1.69 1.76 1.82 8.71E. Monitoring & Phase 2 Prep 0.10 1.13 1.14 1.07 0.17 0.17 3.78F. Irrigation Drainage Res. 0.30 1.00 0.92 0.93 1.05 1.09 5.29G. Monitoring 6 Evaluation 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.36S. Technical Assist. & Trng. 0.03 0.19 0.16 0.18 0.19 0.14 0.88I. Future Proj. Prep ration 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.58 0.60 1.20

Total PROJECTS COSTS 4.04 11.08 13.58 13.67 13.90 14.38 70.65

- 62 -

PAKISTAN Annex 7Table 1

FORDWAH EASTERN SADIOIA (SOUTH)

IRRIGATION AND DRATNAGE PROJECT

Estimated Disbursement Schedule

(US$ Million)

Semester Per Semester Cumulative

FirstSecond 1.53 1.53

mY94FLrst 1.53 3.06Second 4.20 7.26

Flrst 4.20 11.46Second 5.21 16.67

FMFirst 5.21 21.88Second 5.25 27.13

First 5.25 32.38Second 5.36 37.74

FLrst 5.36 43.10Second 5.55 48.65

5mFirst 5.55 54.20

- 63 -

PAKISTAN Annex 7FORDWAH EASTERN SADIOIA (SOUTH) Table 2IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

Disbursements

Amount Percent of ExpenditureCategory (USS Million) to be Financed

1. Civil Works 75% of expenditure

Interceptor Drains WAPDA 13.98Surface Drains 5.20Monitoring and Phase 2 1.87preparation -

21.05

Canal lining PID 10.78Irrigation & Drainage PAD 0.21researchSub-total 32.04

2. Consulting Services 80% of expenditureWAPDA 3.41PID 0.82PAD 0.08

Sub-total 4.31

3. Incremental Staff Salaries, 90% of expenditure.Operating Expenditure 100% of expenditure for

and Training training

WAPDA 4.39PID 0.69PAD 1.10

Sub-total 6.18

4. EquiRment and Vehicles 100% of foreignexpenditures, 100%

WAPDA 0.41 of local expendituresPID 0.13 (ex-factory costs) andPAD 0.17 60% of local expenditure

Sub-total 0.71 for other items procuredlocally

6. UnallocatedWAPDA 5.89PID 4.89PAD 0.18

Sub-total 10.96

Total 4.20

- 64 -

PAKISTAN Annex 8

FORDWAH EASTERN SADIOIA (SOUTH) PHASE 1

IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

Project Imolemetation Schedule

PROJECT YEARS (PY)%

Project Component PYI PY2 PY3 PY4 PY5 PY6 Total

5 15 20 20 20 100Intercfptor Drains

5 15 20 20 20 20 100Canal Lining

30 35 35 100On Farm Water Management

5 15 20 20 20 20 100Surface Drains

5 30 30 15 10 10 100Phase 2 Preparationand Monitoring

5 15 20 20 20 20 100Irrigation & Drainage -

Research5 10 20 20 20 25 100

Monitoring and Evaluation

5 25 20 20 20 10 100Technical Assistance

and Training _10 45 45 100

Future Project Preparation

Procurement:40 50 10 100

Equipment and Vehicles

- 65 -

Annex 9Table 1

PAKISTAN

FORDWAH EASTERN SADIOIA (SOUTH)IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

Surface Water Availability ('000 Acre Feet)

At the Root ZoneCanal Without/a WithHead Present Project Project Incremental

January 39.8 14.6 17.8 20.8 3.0February 87.8 32.1 37.8 44.9 7.1March 103.8 38.0 44.7 52.8 8.1April 100.5 36.8 43.3 51.1 7.8May 108.3 39.6 46.6 55.0 8.4June 106.9 39.1 46.0 54.4 8.4July 108.3 39.6 46.6 55.0 8.4August 103.8 38.0 44.7 52.8 8.1September 98.3 36.7 43.2 51.0 7.8October 95.0 34.8 40.9 48.3 7.4November 109.0 40.5 46.? 55.4 8.5December 103.8 38.0 44.7 52.8 8.1

Rabi 539.3 198.0 232.8 275.0 42.2Kharif 626.1 229.8 270.4 319.3 48.9Annual 1165.4 427.8 503.2 594.3 91.1

/a With On Farm Water Management (OFWM).

- 66 -

Annex 9PAKISTAN Table-2

FCRDWAB EASTERN SADIOZA (SOUTH)IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

Financial Budgot - Total Project(Million Rupees)

Paddy Rabi Mustard Kharif Sugar-tal IRRI) Cotton F Fodder Rave Foder cons Whatk

Present

ProductionMain Outputs 752.3 15.2 226.1 63.8 24.8 68.4 130.7 223.3

By-Produots 38.2 2.0 4.4 - 0.3 - 3.0 28.5

Total 790.6 17.2 230.5 63.8 25.1 68.4 133.7 251.8

Production CostSeed (54.7) (0.2) (4.1) (4.9) (0.3) (1.5) .28.1) (15.6)

Fertilizer (97.1) (3.1) (27.4) (3.4) (1.0) (3.1) (12.1) (47.0)

Water Charges (8.5) (0.4) (2.6) (0.3) (0.2) (0.4) (1.6) (2.8)

Pesticides (73.4) (0.3) (69.8) (0.6) (2.7)

Hired Labor (73.9) (4.3) (25.7) (1.0) (0.3) (0.6) (14.6) (27.4)

Tractor (167.1) (5.3) (41.5) (7.6) (1.0) (7.0) (19.0) (85.6)

Bullockc (15.2) (1.5) (2.8) (0.9) (0.4) (1.1) (1.4) (7.1)

Total (489.9) (15.1) (174.0) (18.2) (3.2) (13.7) (77.5) (188.2)

Net Production Value 300.7 2.1 56.5 45.6 21.9 54.7 56.3 63.6

Without Proict (with OFWM)

ProductionMain Outputs 855.8 15.6 278.2 65.8 25.6 70.5 134.7 265.3

By-Products 44.8 2.1 5.4 0.3 3.1 33.8

Total 900.6 17.7 283.6 85.8 25.9 70.5 137.8 299.2

Production CostSeed (56.4) (0.2) (4.2) (5.1) (0.3) (1.5) (29.0) (16.1)

Fertilizer (100.1) (3.2) (28.2) (3.5) (1.1) (3.2) (12.5) (48.4)

Water Charges (8.7) (0.4) (2.7) (0.4) (0.2) (0.4) (1.7) (2.9)

Pesticides (75.5) (0.3) (71.8) (0.6) (2.8)

Hired Labor (76.0) (4.4) (26.5) (1.0) (0.3) (0.6) (15.1) (28.2)

Tractor (172.2) (5.5) (42.8) (7.9) (1.1) (7.2) (19.6) (88.2)

Bullocks (15.7) (1.6) (2.9) (1.0) (0.4) (1.1) (1.4) (7.3)

Total (504.6) (15.6) (179.1) (18.8) (3.3) (14.1) (79.9) (193.8)

Not Production Value 396.0 2.2 104.4 47.0 22.6 55.4 58.0 105.3

Witb Pro10ct

ProductionMain Outputs 1.109.1 18.7 382.0 79.7 34.5 83.9 182.0 328.3

By-Products 56.4 2.5 7.4 0.5 4.2 41.9

Total 1.165.6 21.2 389.4 79.7 35.0 83.9 186.2 370.2

Production CostSeed (67.2) (0.3) (5.0) (6.1) (0.3) (1.8) (34.5) (19.2)

Fertilizer (119.5) (3.8) (33.7) (4.2) (1.3) (3.8) (14.9) (57.8)

Wetor Charge& (10.4) (0.5) (3.2) (0.4) (0.3) (0.5) (2.0) (3.5)

P4sticides (90.4) (0.3) (86.0) (0.7) (3.4)

Hired Labor (91.2) (5.2) (31.8) (1.3) (0.3) (0.8) (18.1) (33.8)

Tractor (205.4) (6.8) (51.1) (9.3) (1.3) (8.5) (23.4) (105.2)

Bullocks (;8.7) (1.9) (3.5) (1.1) (0.5) (1.3) (1.7) (8.7)

Total (602.8) (18.6) (214.2) (22.4) (4.0) (16.6) (95.2) (231.6)

Not Production Value 562.8 2.5 175.2 57.3 31.0 67.1 91.0 138.6

Incremental Valueof Production 165.8 0.4 70.8 10.3 8.4 10.7 33.1 33.3

- 67 -

Annex 9PAX18T^ Tabloe 3

FORDWAB EASTERN SADIOIA (SOUTH)IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJEC?

Financial Budget(Million Rupees)

Small Farms (3.5 ha) 1,

Paddy Rabi Mustard Iharif Su_er-Total tIRRI) Cotton Fodder & Race Fodder cene Wheat

Preesnt

Value of Production 308.9 6.6 84.7 31.2 11.7 33.5 54.8 86.5Production Cost (179.8) (4.8) (57.9) (7.9) (1.4) (6.2) (32.6) (69.0)Not Produotion Value 129.2 1.8 26.8 23.3 10.3 27.3 22.2 17.5

Without Pro5eet (with OPWM)

Value of Production 360.5 6.8 105.2 32.4 12.1 34.8 56.9 112.4Production Cost (166.6) (4.9) (60.1) (8.2) (1.4) (6.4) (33.9) (71.6)Net Production Volue 173.9 1.9 45.0 24.2 10.7 28.3 23.0 40.8

With Pro.1ect

Value of Production 459.5 7.9 143.8 38.5 16.1 40.6 75.3 137.278Production Cost (217.9) (5.8) (70.2) (9.6) (1.7) (7.5) (39.U) (83.6)Net Production Value 241.5 2.2 73.8 28.9 14.4 33.1 35.7 53.7

Incremental Valuoof Production 67.6 0.3 28.6 4.7 3.7 4.8 12.7 12.9

Large Farms (11 ha) y

Present

Value of Production 481.6 10.7 145.8 32.6 13.5 34.9 78.9 155.3Production Cost (310.1) (10.4) (116.0) (10.3) (1.9) (7.5) (44.8) (119.2)Net Production Value 171.5 0.3 29.7 22.3 11.6 27.4 34.1 46.1

Without Project (with OFWM)

Value of Production 540.1 10.9 178.4 33.5 13.8 35.8 80.9 186.8Production Cost (318.0) (10.6) (119.0) (10.6) (1.9) (7.7) (46.0) (122.3)Net Production Value 222.1 0.3 59.4 22.9 11.9 28.1 34.9 84.5

With Progect

Value of Production 706.1 13.2 245.8 41.2 13.9 43.3 110.9 232.9Production Cost (384.9) (12.9) (144.0) (12.8) (2.3) (9.3) (55.6) (148.0)Net Production Value 321.2 0.4 101.6 28.4 16.6 34.0 55.3 84.9

Incremental Valueof Production 99.1 0.1 42.2 5.5 4.7 5.9 20.4 20.4

f 12.274.V 5,620.

- 68 -

Annex 9PAKISTAN Table 4

FORDWAH EASTERN SADIOIA (SOUTH)IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

Prices Used in Financial and Economic Analysis(in Rupees)

FinancialPrices Economic Prices

Unit (const 1991-92) 1991-92 1998-99 2006-11Outp-uts'Theat kg 2.80 4.73 6.09 5.52Paddy (IRRI) kg 2.00 3.09 2.83 2.54Seed cotton kg 7.13 11.82 12.47 12.15K. Fodder (sorghum, maize) kg 0.30 0.27 0.27 0.27R. Fodder (berseem) kg 0.23 0.21 0.21 0.21Sugarcane kg 0.42 0.33 0.56 0.60Oilseeds (mustard) kg 6.80 6.12 6.12 6.12

InputsSeed 1/Wheat kg 3.30 5.57 7.18 6.51Paddy (IRRI) kg 2.50 3.86 3.54 3.18Cotton kg 7.25 12.02 12.68 12.35K. Fodder (sorghum, maize) kg 2.55 2.30 2.30 2.30R. rodder (berseem) kg 24.00 21.60 21.60 21.60Oilseeds (mustard) kg 6.08 5.47 5.47 5.47Sugarcane cuttings kg 0.42 0.33 0.56 0.60Nitrogen fertilizer kg 2/ 8.87 12.89 13.12 12.25Phosphatic fertilizer kg 2/ 10.83 9.39 10.65 10.48PesticidesCotton Appl/ha 617.30 555.60 555.60 555.60Paddy (IRRI) / 86.00 77.40 77.40 77.40Wheat o/f 86.00 77.40 77.40 77.40Sugarcane " 37.00 33.30 33.30 33.30Bullcck Pairday 45.00 40.50 40.50 40.50Tractor Hour 74.00 66.60 66.60 66.60

Labor Workday 35.00 31.50 31.50 31.50

1/ Usually demands a premium over ouiput price.2/ Of nutrient.]/ Large farm only.

PAKISTAN Annex 10Table 1

FCBDWAE EASTERN SADIOIA (SOUTH) PROJECT. PHASE 1IRRIGATIOR AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006-18

A.1 Cropping and surface water supply pattern same as without project.Excluding Research, Monitoring & Phase 2 Preparation and Future Project Preparation

IncrementalBenefits 3.22 16.33 42.89 87.00 143.58 207.37 260.19 300.39 318.02 312.52 307.28 302.12 297.22 294.81Investmeut Costs 76.06 182.88 231.46 224.41 221.95 218.65O&M Cosq - - - - - - 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 188en-cost -72.83 -166.54 -188.56 -137.41 -78.37 -11.28 242.19 282.4 300.02 294.52 289.28 284.12 279.22 276.81

Internal Rate of Return - 22.22S

A.2 Cropping and surface water supply pattern same as without project.Including Research. Monitoring & Phase 2 Preparation and Future Project Preparation

IncrementalBenefits 3.22 16.33 42.89 87.00 143.58 207.37 260.19 300.39 318.02 312.52 307.28 302.12 297.22 294.81Investment Cost 86.27 232.61 277.58 267.97 260.65 257.35O&M Cost - - - - - - 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18Net Benefits -83.05 -216.27 -234.68 -180.97 -117.07 -49.98 242.19 282.4 300.02 294.52 289.28 284.12 279.22 276.81

Internal rate of Return - 18.49X

8.1 Shift in cropping pattern by 52 and reallocation of 52 of surface water within each season.Excluding Research, Monitoring & Phase 2 Preparation and Future Project Preparation

IncrementalBenefits 4.99 25.19 66.09 134.09 220.73 317.97 397.94 458.20 485.u2 477.86 470.94 464.07 457.67 454.49Invdstment Costs 76.06 182.88 231.46 224.41 221.95 218.65owCost - - - - - - 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18net Benefits -71.07 -157.69 -165.37 -90.31 -1.22 99.32 379.94 440.19 467.02 459.86 452.94 446.07 439.67 436.49

Internal rate of Return - 33.842

B.2 Shift in cropping pattern by 52 and reallocation of 52 of surface water within each season.Including Research. Monitoring & Phase 2 Preparation and Future Project Preparation

InerumentalBenefits 4.99 25.19 66.09 134.09 220.73 317.97 397.94 458.20 485.02 477.86 470.94 464.07 457.67 454.49Investment Cost 86.27 232.61 277.58 267.97 260.65 257.35O0M Cost - - - - - - 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18Not benefits -81.28 -207.42 -211.49 -133.87 -39.92 60.62 379.94 440.20 467.02 459.86 452.94 446.07 439.67 436.49

Internal rate of Return - 28.49S

- 70 -

PAKISTAN Annex 11Page 1

FORDWAH EASTER SADIQIA (SOUTH)IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT

IDA SUPERVISION PLAN

Approximate Activity Expected Skill Staff InputDates Requirements (Staff Weeks)

(Month/Year)

11/92 Project Launch Mission Irrigation Engineer 8(discuss and review all Drainage Engineerprograms under project Procurementand ensure implementing Spec'alistagencies know theirresponsibility)

1/93 Supervision mission Irrigation Engineer 12(review of detailed Drainage Engineerdesigns, construction Agriculturalistplans, construction Canal lining andsupervision Drainage specialistsarrangements, researchdesign and implementationarrangements)

9/93 Supervision mission Irrigation Engineer 6(normal supervision and Institution Specialistreview of conceptualdesign for the"demand based"irrigation and relatedpilot programs)

3/94 Supervision mission As needed 69/94 Supervision mission As needed 6

3/95 Mid-term Review As needed 12

Onwards Two Supervision As needed 24missions per year

3/98 Final Review, Project As needed 6Evaluation andinitiation of PCR process

Total 80

Chart 1

PAKISTAN - FORDWAH EASTERN SADIOIA (SOUTH) PHASE IIRRIGATION & DRAINAGE PROJECT

Project OrganizatUon & Coordination among existing Agencies

[ POLICY COMMITTEE j

| PROJECT COORDINATION MONITORING ANDCOMMITTEE EVALUATION

SMO.Envlronmenlal Unit'4 _ _ _ _ _ _… _ P & I/WMED

9 i i S vSDIRECTORATE GENERAL DIRECTORATE GENERAL DIRECTORATE OF IRRIGATION WOF AGRICULTURE EXTN. OF OFWM COMMAND WATER MGMT. DEPARTMENT WAPDA

Deputy Director ~~~~~~Team Leader Chief Engineer PD (Drainage)* Deputy Director * Area Coordinator Social Organizers J2) Coordination IWASRI(Bawalnagar) Fi*eld Teams (4) Agronomists (2) PD (Canal Lining) P&I*EADAs (3) *Agronomy Teams (4) Engineers/Hydrologists (4) Executive Engineers (2) PD Planning (water)Subdivislonal Offcers

SDO (3)__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

- Development of Water Course Reseach on CanalLining InterceptorDrai!-.xtension messags IpoentIntegrated Inrigated SuaalLnig-Intecepo DrainsAgriculture Mgmt. - Collaboratng with Phase 2 preparaUonvArranging audio - Demonstraton centers Farmer Organization CWM on research Irrigaton and Drainagevisual sosat FamrOgaao for demand based Researchdemonstration centers . Water Management Seedrm system MondodngAdvic/ExteslonProgram

-Future Projectpreparation

Legend:

-0 Direct line of command

* .* * 11, Vertical coordinaton

No Horizontal coordinabon

sads\w51 172

FORDWAH EASTERN SADIQIA (SOL rt

\ t ~~~~~~~~~~~~pROJECT LOCATtON?

ISA\C RE P. 0 Poels| Fpdnukels* oinlnlo TAJAKI57AN

I S L A M -o r Fl -dS_ p q i o u d r n

O QF I R A N X osr-

i / * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A F G Hi A N I S T A N iin D-<

\ Pv_T q -\>,. r Nushb ~~~~~~ ~ ~~P,,h,rP tw / Mi-csh* PEsHAwAe Ud

|,,< Whoos O~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~UETTA -, t=OTEEs FF.1bwFi TAVL N

aolur o / C 1sI KsD .;> -t Rwni ndjrvLTW ts .C.,.

- " ~~KWud KJlv/J IV j _ A DB M ) -SRINAGAiR

b n > @ 9 ~~~~~~~~~D-GEho.iKhul * AXi ^ rA^

_S =t==m X oS r ww, R

S 4

=nbC ". l hkA9t ., _,) J_~~~~~~~~~~~~~A _4FKITG

OAM ,

04N~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ D

|~' * i)' .Z. . 0 .: PAKISTAN f'.i AIS '

FORDWAH EASTERN SADIQIA (SOUTH) PHASE I _ "*IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE PROJECT , 9'

PROJECT AREA Sahowolnogor ,

M. ... cd P.,

S ) ~~~~~ _ _ _ z _ ~~~~~~~~~ ChiAhficn//e._ J

/ \ _ o;<:ndwolo /v s~~~~~~~~~crolo wca f t/

PROJECT AREA BOUNDARY

DEAINS

L-n a ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~RIVERCANALS, DIST/I/IUTARIES. AND MINORS

Do 7hwIa M CITIES AND TOWNS

-METALLED RtOADS

R-AIROADS ISTATION'S

C.W.M.P. _UNSOASY

kLr .= 4 ,,' i , <, s . i/ -' - INIERNATIONAL BLONDARIES

%7~~~~~~~~~-

9a Foqirrwo!

N/ >/t. uQ----- /' ___________________

'{' .O 15KILOMEEERS

~. #-?~,A&.dhTh-d .hp,*cMWd