Chapter Three

3. Planning Water Resource Projects

Water resources comprise all forms of water including Blue water, water in the rivers,
lakes, seas and shallow aquifers, which has received an attention from water
resources planners. These water resources need planning prior to development:
It includes all the work associated with design of the project except its details. There is
no substitute for experience and good engineering judgment in the selection of the
method of approach to project planning. Project planning also requires evaluation of
alternatives.

3.1. Stages in Planning a Water Resources Project

This section assumes that the general location and purpose of the prospective project
have already been determined by an earlier screening process or Other Means of
designation. The following describes a typical five-stage sequence of reports,
documents, and actions for the project, including the preliminary (or reconnaissance)
report, the feasibility report, the contract documents, and activities during
construction and operation.

3.1.1. First Stage: Preliminary (or Reconnaissance) Survey

This consists of office studies, field studies, and the preparation of a report. The report
prepared as a result of these studies should answer the following questions:

 Is it likely a feasible project?

 What are approximate estimates of capacity and cost?
 What additional studies are needed to confirm feasibility?

The investigation begins with office studies, using available information contained in
previous reports, Maps and data. Much of this is available from federal, state, and
local governmental agencies. Utilities, private firms, newspapers, libraries, and other
source should also be contacted. Basic materials, include maps and photographs

1
(topographic maps, land surveys, county and city tax maps, transportation maps,
aerial photographs), geologic and soil surveys data, climate data, stream flow and
ground water records, quality and sediment measurements, information on
ecological and environmental condition, and data and forecasts pertinent to the
specific purpose of the project (e.g., projection of water supply requirements, or
electric power demands, characteristics of existing water supply, or electric generation
and transmission systems etc.).
Office studies may be adequate to make initial determinations of the general
arrangement of the project components, the capacity of the services it can provide,
and its cost better estimates can be made by supplementing office studies by field
reconnaissance surveys. This work is needed to confirm the estimates made in
office studies, to suggest changes in them, and to obtain detailed information
concerning such matters as needed relocation in cases where the available maps are
not recent. Topographic surveys, stream measurement, and geological and soils
investigations may be needed for gathering information for preliminary planning, but
these should be kept to a minimum, consistent with the nature of the preliminary
report. The personnel involved in this work are normally engineers and geologists, but
it may also include personnel environmentalists and other specialists.

3.1.2. Second Stage: Feasibility Study

If the project sponsor determines that additional studies are necessary based on the
preliminary report and other consideration, a feasibility report will be prepared. The
report should contain enough information to permit a decision on whether or not to
implement the project. This implies technical studies more detailed than those
required for the preliminary report, financial and economic analyses, and a plan for
project implementation. The feasibility report should include the following:
 Descriptions and analyses of the data
 Confirmation of construction feasibility based on additional field and laboratory
investigations, studies of project arrangement and individual project features,
and analysis of construction methods (sources of construction materials,
access to the project site, diversion of water during construction, etc)

2
  Final recommendation for arrangement of project works, preliminary plants and
other analyses to determine the principal quantities of construction, a reliable
cost estimate, and discussions of the design criteria
 Construction schedule showing the timing and costs of project features
 Economic analyses of the project
 Financial analyses projecting the year-by-year costs, revenues, and subsidies
for the project
 Plants for financing construction ,and for managing the construction and
operation of the project
 Institutional and legal requirements
 Assessments of the environmental and social impacts of construction and
operation ,and other impact studies if required
Depending on the extent of detailed drawing and of analyses needed to confirm
construction feasibility and make reliable estimates of project cost, the work in this
phase consists of designs in addition to planning studies.

3.1.3. Third Stage: Final Design and Preparation of Contract Documents

Contract documents include plans, drawings and specifications which are sufficiently
detailed to obtain tenders (bids) from qualified construction and equipment
contractors. The plans (drawings) and specifications are based on additional studies of
the details of project works, the logistics of construction, other aspects related to
temporary and permanent facilities, and permanent facilities, and the performance of
contractors. The contract documents also contain additional information on the
responsibilities of the project and the contractor. Various forms to complete by the
contractor provide information on the contractor’s legal status and financial
capabilities, set forth the quantities and prices for construction and for equipment,
and elaborate on the construction methods proposed by the contractor.

The sponsor and engineers review the tenders made by contractors. A major factor is
the prices offered by a contractor. But other factors considered may include the
reputation and previous experience of the contractor, the specific working methods
proposed to carry out the construction or manufacture of equipment and in the case of
the latter, and the operating efficiency of the equipment to be provided.

3
Contractors’ tenders are usually ranked after weighting the factors, in order to
determine which tenders are in the sponsor’s best interest, and awards are made
accordingly.

3.1.4. Fourth stage: Construction

Additional detailed drawings needed during construction are prepared by the

sponsor’s engineers and by the contractors subject to the sponsor’s approval.
Payments to the contractors are usually made based on measurements of work in
progress or completed, in accordance with the terms of the contract documents.
Usually, a percentage of each payment is withheld by the sponsor and released only
when the work is entirely completed and accepted, supervision of construction by the
sponsor’s engineers often includes field layout of major works, approval of contractors’
choices of working procedures and materials, interpretation of the plans and
specifications, approval of the contractors’ drawings needed to supplement the
engineers’ drawings, inspection of construction activities and of finished work to
ensure conformance with plans and specifications, measurement of quantities of
construction, and certifications required as a basis for payments to the contractors.

3.1.5. Fifth stage: Operation

The sponsor may employ outside engineers and other consultants to assist in
operation for a limited period, train operators, prepare manuals for operation and
maintenance, and monitor the performance of the various features (structural,
hydrologic, hydraulic, etc.). Studies of operating rules may continue as experience
develops.

3.2. Water Resources Project Formulation and Evaluation

3.2.1. Introduction-Future projections:

All the water resources development projects are usually planned to meet not only the
life of the project. For this purpose the projection of future needs is required to be
made from the data collected. The projections should not be made as simple
extrapolations of the past growth rate. Social, economic and technological development
of the region may cause significant changes in trends and therefore the future growth

4
rate may be quite different from the past growth rate. Every effort should be made to
anticipate the future changes and judiciously use the available data evaluating the
future needs of the water.

Projections should include the study of future population growth, land use, water
requirements for various uses, likely change in patterns etc. Projections should be
done with great care, taking into consideration all the factors that may affect the
future requirements. If the projections are on the lower side, the project will not serve
the required purpose. On the other hand, if the projections are unrealistically high,
the project will be over designed and it would lead to excessive investments. The aim
therefore should be to evaluate the future demands based on realistic projections.
The development process for water resources project compromises of formulation,
construction and operation of a project. It is a dynamic process, comprising of the
following steps.

3.2.2. Project Formulation:

Actual formulation of the project is commenced after the basic data have been
collected and the projections have been made. The project formulation requires a lot of
imagination and skill and can be done only by an experienced planner. A list of
various alternatives is made and all these alternatives are properly evaluated. The
process of project formulation is as follows.

1. Problem Identification and statement of the problem: This includes the

determination of need for the project on the context of use/ control of water, market,
demand for the product and political incentive. The planner must have a clear
statement of the problem about the project, before he starts the planning. The
objectives of a project depend upon the availability of funds.

2. Solution identification: This consists of data collection inventory of all resources

analysis of data and developing solutions. The data so collected should be highly
reliable for the realistic planning of a water resources project. Apart from hydrological
and topographic data of site, data pertaining to other fields such as geological,
economic and social data are required.

5
3. Projection for planning: The water resources projects are not planned for present
needs only, but they are also planned to cater the future needs. Hence projections of
future needs compatible to the population growth should be made. However,
unrealistic water use for future needs may lead over design and excessive investments.

4. Definition of alternatives & evaluation of alternatives: This consists of

formulation of alternative systems of structural and nonstructural measurers in the
light of constraints on the resources. The alternatives which have some restraints and
boundary conditions are evaluated first.

Boundary conditions: some of the boundary conditions which restrict the project are
as follows.
 There may be physical limitations due to which one or more aspects of water
resources developments can be examined, for example no navigation is possible
on torrential streams.
 Certain problems may be localized for example flood control of a particular city
 There may be limitations on the available water
 Maximum land areas required for various purposes may be limited
 There may be existing rules or policy decisions which reserve certain areas for
specific purposes such as parks and protection.
 Possible sites for surface water storage and underground water storage may be
limited.
 There may be legal constraints which may reserve certain areas or prohibit
certain constraints.

3.2.3. Project Evaluation

The main steps of the evaluation process are as follows.
To quantify and elaborate:
 The scope and extent of the system
 The structural and non structural components of the system
 Constraints of topography, hydrology, structural, financial, institutional etc.

6
  Target demands for various purposes i.e. for irrigation, hydropower, domestic
water supply, recreation, flood management aspects etc.

To analyze:
 Evaluation of alternative plans that have been identified at earlier stages,
 Economic analysis
 Assessment of environmental impact of alternative plans

Pre-feasibility study is considered to be over when potential alternative plans have

been selected. In many countries public hearings is held at this stage to explain the
plan, and elicit public views and comments.

The project evaluation is carried out to select the alternative which is economically
most suitable of the various alternatives listed in the proceeding step of project
formulation. If the best alternative meets the laid economic criteria, such as the
minimum expected benefit cost-ratio, it may be adopted for construction. The best
alternative may consists of a unit or a combination of units which are economically
most efficient. After the alternatives have been listed, the planner should have data
which would aid in the selection of the best alternative. For the economic evaluation,
data on benefits and costs are collected. Each alternative should be specified in detail
so that costs can be accurately estimated. The methods used for estimating both cost
and benefits should be consistent so that the resulting costs and the benefits for the
various alternatives are truly comparable.
For selecting the most efficient unit, the first step is to find out whether the individual
units are physically and economically independent or not then environmental impact
evaluation follows.

A) Physical unit evaluation: Physically independent unit is a unit which has no

other unit either upstream or downstream of the unit under consideration which
would affect the inflow to the unit or which would be affected by the outflow from the
unit. Moreover for a unit to be physically independent there should not be any other
unit in the region which contributes to the same objectives. For example if there is a
reservoir on a different stream but also provides flood control for a down stream

7
control point of the unit in question, it would also affect the unit and therefore the
unit will not be physically independent.

B) Economical Unit evaluation: Economically independent unit is a unit in which

there is no economic inter-connection with any other unit. For example if there is a
power plant on the river in the region ,there is no physical inter-connection as far as
the stream flow is concerned but if it serves the same grid, it would affect the unit
under consideration and therefore the unit will not be economically independent.

For the units which are physically and economically independent it is relatively easier
to find out the best alternative .For the inter-dependent units, the problem becomes
more complex. The following discussion is limited to the physically and economically
independent units. These units may be either single purpose units or multipurpose
units as discussed below.

Evaluation of a single purpose unit: For independent, single purpose unit, the
evaluation is relatively easy. The unit is evaluated in terms of benefit-cost ratio as well
as rate of returns. The economic analysis is done to determine the maximum benefit
cost-ratio or to determine the maximum net benefits. The rate of investment is
determined from excessive of benefits over costs that will accrue over the period of
project.

Evaluation of multipurpose units: For a multipurpose independent unit the

evaluation is more difficult. It requires the preparation of a net–benefit surfaced
instead of a curve if the unit serves two purposes. Moreover if there are more than two
purposes it would require a multidimensional space.

If number of purposes is more than two, a large number of net surfaces would be
required, because a number of combinations of the various purposes will have to be
considered. However even in that case, generally two major purposes will govern and
the optimum combination can be found by keeping the other purposes at a constant
level. Each combination of two primary purposes should be evaluated to determine the
optimum benefit

8
The financial analysis to compare project alternatives may be performed in several
ways as follows.

1. Determination of net benefits, which is equal to the economic benefits minus

economic costs.
2. Determination of benefit cost ratio
3. Determination of rate of return on investment which is equal to (annual benefits-
annual costs) / (investment cost)
4.Determination of the internal rate of return ,which is the rate of discount applied to
annual costs and benefits so that the present worth of all costs equal the present
worth of all benefits.

Out of these benefit cost ratio is the most common indicator adopted in economic
analysis.

C) Environmental impact evaluation: A water resources development project

may have a number of effects on environment and ecological balance. It should be
judged for its undesirable impacts and ecological balance. It should be judged for its
undesirable impacts on the stream and the adjacent areas. Out of these selected
alternatives the project which has minimum detrimental effects on environment
should be performed for consideration.

Some of the common environmental effects are as follows.

1. Because of accumulation of sediments in the reservoir the water released

from the reservoir is relatively silt free. It causes the degradation of the channel
down stream of the reservoir.
2. There is loss of some valuable geological, historical, archaeological or
scenic sites due to submergence caused by a reservoir.
3. There is usually damage to the fish and wild life.
4. There may be changes in ecology of an area due to extinction of some species
of flora and fauna.

9
5. There is damage to vegetation on the river bank due to changes of flow
patterns.
6. Due to construction of large dams, there is usually change in natural
landscape of the region.
7. There may be change in the water quality as a result of drainage from
irrigation project.
8. There are number of rehabilitation problems for the people affected by the
submerged areas.

10
 3.3. Common Pitfalls in Water resources planning
There are a number of pitfalls in the planning of water resources development projects
which may nullify otherwise excellent effort made in project evaluation and analysis. Some
of the common pitfalls are as follows. The planner should be extremely careful to avoid
these pitfalls.

1. Blind adherence to existing practices: Several standards and practices have been
developed by different agencies based on traditional and administrative experience. These
standards should not be blindly followed, because they may not always be applicable to a
particular project. For example a spillway is usually constructed of concrete for a flood
recurrence interval of 50 years. Change in the material or the recurrence interval may be
considered.

2. Incomplete preliminary report: Because there are a large number of possible

alternative projects, it is common practice to prepare a preliminary report for each project.
If the project is not suitable, it is dropped without incurring further expenditure. If it is
suitable, more through studies are made. As the preliminary report is an important is an
important document on the basis of which a project is accepted or rejected. it should be
complete and not based on approximation and short cum procedures. For a complete
report the study of hydrology and water use should be conducted in detail because
inadequate study may lead to serious error. The maps should be accurate and not rough.
Of course this will increase the cost of the preliminary studies, but overall loss may not be
much because it would reduce the cost of the final design of the selected project to some
extent.

3. Too early construction: A project should be constructed only when it is needed. If it is

constructed too early, it would be wastage of funds which might have been utilized for other
works. The argument that the cost of the project would increase if postponed is not fully
justified because the funds are not usually limited and the available funds are utilized
elsewhere during the extended period. Moreover, the benefits would also increase at the
later stage and would at least partially offset the increase cost. In some cases, stage-
construction may be done in stages so that the reservoir size would increase with growing
needs. However the land to be submerged should be acquired considering the full height of

11
the dam to avoid future problems. Moreover, the outlets etc in the dam should be proposed
considering the ultimate requirements.

4. Wrong justification of a flood-control reservoir: It would be wrong to build flood-

control reservoir on the basis of the anticipated future growth of the area to be protected.
The flood-control reservoir should be constructed only when it is justified considering the
existing value of the area to be protected

5. A prior decisions: A prior decisions should be avoided in water resources development

projects. A prior decisions regarding certain features of a project are sometimes made
before conducting an economic analysis and are not checked subsequently whether they
would be economically viable or not.

6. Failure to consider all alternatives: Probably the most common pitfall in project
planning is the failure to consider all possible alternatives. Generally non-engineering
alternatives such as flood plain zoning in a flood-control project are over locked by
engineers. Sometimes even simple engineering alternatives also omitted, especially when
those alternatives depart from the traditional solutions.

7. Not considering true prices: The sale price of water is generally subsidized and fixed
low. It therefore does not reflect the actual value of water. While calculating the benefits
from a water resources development projects the true sale price of water should not be used
in the economic analysis.

8. Incorrect use of next best alternatives: Sometimes the cost of the next best
alternative is taken as a measure of estimating benefits and for justification of a project. By
unrealistic selection of the next best alternatives project, the benefits can be made to look
quite large. For example, for developing a municipal water supply project for a town near
sea, the cost of desalted sea water is taken for the comparison. It is not a realistic
comparison because the consumers would not be willing to pay the high cost of desalted
water even if this was the only alternative. The realistic alternative project which would be
acceptable as a basis for estimating benefits is the one which would have been constructed
by tapping other water resources if the project under study was dropped.

12