Rogun Hydropower Project

Techno-Economic Assessment

INDEPENDENT PANEL OF EXPERTS

ENGINEERING/DAM SAFETY PANEL

15 May 2011

TEAS Panel of Experts (PoE) Membership

Roger Gill (Chair) - Hydropower Policy Expert

Ljiljana Spasic-Gril - Dam Engineering/Dam Safety/ Seismic Engineering Expert

Paul Marinos - Engineering Geology/Rock Mechanics Expert (will visit site in future)

2

Terms of ReferenceTo ensure due diligence and international quality

standards in the studies

To provide independent advice and guidance to support objectivity and credibility in the assessment process

To share technical expertise and knowledge

PRIMARY OUTCOME:

Ensure international standards of design, risk evaluation and impact assessment are met

Assure a level of confidence amongst the international community in the quality and integrity of the assessment process and findings

3

PoE Process

To date PoE have reviewed ToR, Inception Report, completed a first site visit and held discussions in Dushanbe

PoE members are confident that the process should ensure that no BIG issues are overlooked

4

Client (Barki Tajik)

TEAS Consultant (Coyne et Bellier/ELC/IPA)

Hydroprojekt Moscow (HPM)

ESIA Consultant (Poyry)

TEAS at feasibility stage while HPM is undertaking detailed design

Coordination and communication between all the parties is critical to the effective execution of the program

TEAS consultant should visit HPM in Moscow and view the spillway physical model

Sharing short fortnightly Progress Reports amongst the key Actors is recommended

Integrating the Key Actors

5

Recommendations to guide future work

To align with good international practice for hydropower and large dam projects the following areas need attention:

Clarify the principal design criteria Identify key risk mitigation measures (current and

planned) Economic evaluation Understand the long term sustainability of the

storage under high sediment inflows Clarify transboundary water management plans

6

Principal Design CriteriaMust clearly indentify the principal design criteria for

the full project and for Stage 1 to align the project development work with international standards

The criteria are requested separately from HPM and TEAS consultants and should be based on the current and future plans

Including (but not limited to): Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) criteria Safe flood passage criteria Seismic design parameters Criteria for design of structures to accommodate regional

seismicity Operating criteria Sediment management

7

Identifying Key Risk Mitigations

PoE must be convinced that mitigation actions are in place to address the key project risks

Mitigation measures must reduce the potential risk impacts to internationally acceptable levels

Risk rating = (consequence) x (likelihood)

Risk rating is assessed both before and after mitigation actions are in place

8

Addressing Key Risk Mitigations (1)The PoE recommends that an initial workshop be

held in July to agree the key risk mitigation profile of the Rogun Dam project

The output would be a table identifying how the major risks are to be mitigated, for example purposes only:

9

Risk item Category before Mitigation

Mitigation action

Category after Mitigation

Inability to pass PMF

Extreme Suitable spillway design

Low

Risk Categories

10

Table of Risk Tolerance Categories

Consequence

Likelihood Insignificant Minor Moderate Major Extreme Catastrophic

Almost Certain Low Medium High Extreme Extreme Extreme

Likely Low Medium High Extreme Extreme Extreme

Possible Low Low Medium High Extreme Extreme

Unlikely Low Low Low Medium High Extreme

Rare Low Low Low Low Medium High

Extremely Rare Low Low Low Low Low Medium

Initial Risk Workshop

In advance of the workshop: the Key Actors will separately prepare their list of

top 10 or so risks and associated mitigation actions using an agreed format.

At the workshop: we will collectively agree the post mitigation or

residual risk impact category based on an agreed set of definition

11

EconomicsUnderstanding the cost/benefit analysis of a

project is fundamental to sustainable practice and to ensure the effective allocation of capital

An initial cost/benefit analysis should be completed by the TEAS consultant, in collaboration with ESIA consultant by the end of June to guide decision making during the feasibility study, including:

an update of the cost estimate of the project an assessment of the market opportunities for

electricity sales recognition of the full benefits of Rogun

The initial analysis should be completed for both the full project and Stage 1

12

Key Actor’s - Different Timeframes

Client – wishes to divert mid Nov 2011

TEAS Consultant – needs additional site investigations to complete full feasibility study (more than 1 year to complete)

World Bank/PoE – international standards must be met and residual risks acceptable (18 month study)

The question is – How can the different timeframes be managed?

13

Client’s Timeframe

14

Managing Different Timeframes

Could be done if Stage 1 is considered as a stand alone project meeting international standards with a normal design life (>100 years) to cover the possibility that stage 2 is delayed

TEAS – should prepare feasibility design for a stand alone Stage 1 dam to 1110m asl

Client - undertakes additional site investigations in accordance with specifications by TEAS consultant and with their oversight

15

Stage 1 Stand Alone FeasibilityDuring a >100 year design life Stage 1 must:

safely pass PMFaccommodate maximum seismic eventbe economically sustainable together with Nurek, both facilities must sustainably

cope with the sediment load

Distance from Dam

Dam 18 km

1100

After 7 yrs

16

Example of Dam Option at Stage 1

BUT must accommodate the salt wedge treatment

17

Transboundary Water Management

The operational discharge regime should be explored by the TEAS in conjunction with ESIA Consultant for Rogun and the Vakhsh cascade to enable the ESIA consultant to address the transboundary water management issues and opportunities for joint benefits across riparian countries

18

Long Term Sediment ManagementMitigation measures to address the long term

sediment impacts must be considered to demonstrate that dam safety can be assured in the very long term:

Spillway capability, dam height and seismicity are key issues

Reference: Palmieri et al (2003) “Reservoir Conservation – the Rescon Approach – economic and engineering evaluation of alternative strategies for managing sedimentation in storage reservoirs”

19

Inception Phase - PoE Recommendations

1. HPM and TEAS consultants to produce principal design criteria

2. Hold Risk Mitigation management workshop

3. Undertake initial cost/benefit analysis (Full project and Stage 1)

4. Stage 1 design must have a design life >100 years

5. Consider mitigation measures to address the long term sediment impacts and ensure dam safety

6. Explore operational discharge regime to assist in addressing transboundary water management issues

7. Ensure co-ordination between the Key Actors by sharing fortnightly progress reports

20