No 16272010-PA (N) 1240 - 76 GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Datef ~ 2010
Sub 10Sth meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 25062010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at Ilew Delhi on 25 th June 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Enc As above ] fYVvv R
(S K~ sriva~~ Chief Engineer (PAG) cum f 0
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi I
2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room 110-255 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room 110-401 SS Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
~ 18 Commissioner (Ganga) Ministry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Secretary Water Resources Department Government of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan
20
2l
22
23
24
25
26
27 28 29 30
31 32
33
Patna-800 015 Principal Secretary Water Resources Department Government of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya Arera Hills Bhopal Secretary (Water Resources) Government of Chhattisgarh DK Bhawan Sachivalaya Raipur-492 010 Chhattisgarh Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary (Irrigation amp Power) Government of Uttaranchal Sachivalaya Dehradun-248 001 (Uttarakhand) Secretary (Water Resources) Government of Orissa Secretariat Bhubaneshwarshy751 001 (Orissa) Secretary Irrigation amp Waterways Directorate Government of West Bengal Writers Building Kolkata-700 00 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New Delhi Chief Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi Chief Engineer Monitoring- Central CWC CGO complex Seminary Hills Nagpur Chief Engineer (NBO)CWC Paryawas Bhawan Mother Teresa Marg Arera Hills Bhopal-4620 11
Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177 - B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 (Bihar) Chief Engineer (VIER) Mahanadi amp Eastern Rivers CWC Plot No 655 Sahid Nagar Bhubneshwar - 751007 (Orissa) Chief Engineer (UGB) Upper Ganga Basin CWC Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira Nagar Lucknow- 226024 (Uttar Pradesh)
Copy for information to 34 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources Room No-407 Ilew Delhi
1051hSUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI
25thPURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON JUNE 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNO-ECONOMIC VIABILlT OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 105111 meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposa ls was held on 25062010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting It was observed that the representatives trom the Ministry of Agriculture Tribal Affairs and Environment amp Forest were not present in the meeting This was viewed seriously by the Chairman and accordingly it was advised to issue necessary directives to these Ministries to depute their representatives in the meetings of the Advisory Committee ill future
Thereafter the Chairman requested the Member-Secretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 104TH MEETING
104th The Summary Record of Discussions of the Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA (N)960-993 dated 21052010 Member-Secretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summarv Record of discussions of the 104th Advisory Committee meeting J
il) PROJECT PROPOSALS PUT UP FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
1 Restoration Works of Eastern Gandak Canal (Revised-Major) Bihar
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Restoration works of Eastern Gandak Canal an ERM scheme was accorded investment clearance by the Planning Commission in May 2004 for Rs 294 Cr at 2001 PL to restore CCA of 48 lakh ha and annual irrigation of 662 lakh ha This will provide irrigation facilities to East Champaran West Champaran Vaishali and Muzaffarpur districts
The present proposal envisages restoration and replacement of 10 components
a) Restoration of designed section of canal by desilting (Eastern Tirhut Main canal having length of 240 78 km 11 branchsub-~ranch canals having length 421 08 km 24 distributaries of 131 km length 132 sub distributaries of 1052 km length 424 minors and 1342 sub-minors)
b) Repairs to Gandak brarrage and its appurtenances c) Replacement of all the damaged structures with new ones
d) Renovation of all the pucca works like lining etc and structures to increase their longevity
e) Construction of few additional structures as per present site condition in line with approval of the Govt of Bihar
f) LOPE lining in selected reaches in high filling zones to avoid possibility of seepage
g) Brick tile lining in the selected canal reaches where earthwork has already been completed
hbull bull J Repar of damaged hydraulic gates in canal structures i) Constructionrepair of outlets at suitable locations j) Installations of telecommunication system for operation of canal
procurementdocumentation of technical records Preparation of manual for canal operation and water management PIM implementation for ascertaining assured irrigation to the beneficiaries and maintenance and operation of the canal through the beneficiaries
Apart from aboveworks following emergent works are also included in the present p(oposal
a) Restoration of mechanical work of barrage appurtenants as suggested by CWC
b) Restoration and strengthening of Cross-Drainage (CD) work at RD 29300 of Triveni Branch canal across Koraina river which includes construction of all bank connections construction of damaged canal trough and river training works for diversion of river streams
The present revised cost estimate without change in scope has been finalized for Rs 68478 cr at 2009-PL with BC ratio as 296 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
The project was discussed in length Member (WPampP) informed that the project is not included under AIBP It was informed by Principal Secretary Govt of Bihar that the construction work has already been started and it will be completed by March 2013 It was further informed by Govt of Bihar that during construction the closure of the existing canal would be done during rabi season only
Planning Commission informed that CGWB has been carrying out studies of conjunctive use for addressing the problem of water logging in the Gandak canal command area falling between Gandak and Burhi Gandak rivers
Chairman desired that the submission of CGWB report may be expedited by the Govt of Bihar and suggested to take remedial measures for water logged area based on recommendations of CGWB It was also advised to explore the possibility of increasing CCA through conjunctive use of ground and surface water in the command
After discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
2
Kharung Project (Major ERM-New) Chhattisgarh
CE (PAO) CWC gave a brief account of project Kharung Tank is an old completed med tank constructed during year 1 1930
across Kharung river a tributary of Sheonath river in Mahanadi system in Bilaspur district of Chhattisgarh state
Kharung k project is very old project and canal has been providing since the last years During period
only minor maintenance has As a result conditions of project components been over time reby causing gradual in seepage
present proposal envisages only the provIsion of concrete lining in its distribution system remodeling of structures in order and provide irrigation for additional 15 from water thus saved
project proposal envisages construction the following main works
i)
ji)
mm cement concrete lining along with low density poly film of 1 micron thickness the bed as well as on
for a total length 110 km of main canal and respective distribution system Re-modellingrepairing of District Road
iii) IV)
v) vi)
Re-modellingrepairing Head Regulators regulators etc Re-modellingrepairing of falls (16 Nos) in Main canals and its distributaries and Minors Nos) Re-modellingrepairing of in Main (4 Nos) Re-modellingrepairing of DrainageDrainage SyphonsAcqueduct Nos in Main canals amp 21 in distributaries and Minors)
price cost of with BC ratio as
been finalized 309
Rs 10104 crore2008-09 Concurrence been
obtained (copy as Annexure-III)
After brief discussion the Committee proposal
Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERM-New) Chhattisgarh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the proposal The iyari Tank project is an old completed tank constructed during the 1 1930 across Maniyari river a tributary of Sheonath river in Mahanadi system in Bilaspur district Chhattisgarh
present proposal is only for provIsion cement concrete lining in canal and its distribution and remodeling of existing structures to
3
save seepage water and thus to provide irrigation for additional 11000 ha in 32 villages without affecting any parameter of the reservoir
The cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 15995 crore at 2008-09 price level with BC ratio as 181
The Chairman enquired that while computing BC ratio of the project why the old project cost has not been taken into consideration The Project Authorities replied that being an old project the depreciation of the project is too high to consider As a result the impact on BC ratio would be negligible The Chairman suggested for conjunctive utilization of suriace and ground water in the command area so as to reduce the impact of water logging
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that the project may be deferred for reconsideration in the next meeting
4 Halon Irrigation Project (New Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC gave a brief account of the project proposal The Halon Irrigation Project envisages construction of a composite dam near village Karanjiya in the district of Mandia of Madhya Pradesh across river Halon a tributary of river Burne in Narmada basin The Halon Irrigation Project contemplates to provide annual irrigation facilities to an area of 16782 ha (CCA - 13040 ha) in Mandla district a tribal district of Madhya Pradesh The project will irrigate land on the left bank through gravity flow canal
84thThe project was earlier considered in the meeting of Advisory Committee held on 12052005 and was deferred for want of final environmental clearance clearance of RampR plan clearance from CGWB and in the absence of site specific discharge data to review the yield
The Chairman enquired about the status of statutory clearances of the project The Project Authorities replied that all the requisite statutory clearances from Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) Ministry of Environment amp Forest (MoEF) and clearance from CGWB have now been obtained As regards forest clearance it was informed by the Project officials that stage-1 clearance has been obtained and the work will be started after stage-2 clearance
The representative from CEA enquired regarding the provision of Hydroshypower generation in the project The Project Authorities mentioned that provision of Hydro-power generation was not found viable as per the site conditions The Chairman enquired about why the BC ratio of the project is very marginal ie 155 The Project Authorities replied that the command area of the project falls in Mandla district a tribal area in Madhya Pradesh As such the BC ratio is well within the permissible limits The State Finance Concurrence has been received
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
4
5 Man Irrigation Project (Revised Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The original proposal was approved by the Planning Commission in June 1992 for Rs 44 10 cr at 1983 price level The present proposal is a revised cost estimate without any change in its scope and the cost has been finalized for Rs 24603 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 179 The expenditure incurred till March 2010 is 196 crore The State Finance Concurrence has already been received
Chairman enquired about the construction status of the project The Project Authorities replied that the dam and head works of the project had already been completed in 2006 and the canal system is already in operation since the last two years Only some residual works are to be completed by March 2012
Chairman suggested for conjunctive utilization of surface and ground water in the command area to reduce the impact of water logging in consultation with CGWB
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further cost time revision will be considered by the Committee
6 Upper Narmada Irrigation Project (New Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Upper Narmada Irrigation Project envisages construction of a composite dam of maximum height of 3380 m and total length of 212 km near village Shobhapur (Rinatola) of Dindori district of Madhya Pradesh The project contemplates to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 26622 ha annually in Annupur and Dindori districts of Madhya Pradesh Most of the beneficiaries from the project belong to Schedule Caste (SC) and Schedule Tribe (ST) categories
The project was considered in the 84 th meeting of Advisory Committee held on 1205 2005 and was deferred for want of environmental clearance and RampR clearance
The cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 68393 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 157 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IV)
Chairman enquired about the status of statutory clearances of the project The Project Authorities replied that all the requisite statutory clearances from Ministry of Tribal Affairs (lVIoTA) and Ministry of Environment amp Forest (MoEF) have now been obtained On query regarding the physical programme of the project the Project Authorities replied that the project works would be awarded on turn-key basis and would be completed by March 2015 The Chairman asked why the BC ratio of the project is marginal (153)
5
f The Project Authorities replied that the command area of the project falls
in Annupur amp Dindori districts a tribal area in Madhya Pradesh As such the BC ratio is well with in the permissible limits (1)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
7 Shelgaon Barrage Project (New-Medium) Maharashtra
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Shelgaon Barrage a medium irrigation project envisages construction of 41965 m long barrage across river Tapi in Tapi basin The project is located near village Shelgaon in the Jalgaon district of Maharashtra The project is planned to irrigate annually an area of 11318 ha (CCA-9589 ha) benefiting 19 villages of Jalgaon district
The project envisages construction of the following main components
i) A 419 65 m long barrage with 18 Nos of radial gates of size 1830 m x 1676m
ii) A 465 m long left side earthen embankment and 165 m long saddle earthen embankment with a top width of 75 m
iii) An intake well of size 3 m x 11 m and jack well of size 9 m x 24 m along with 5 Nos of VT pumps of 1400 HP
The estimated cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 44649 crore at 2008-09 price level with BC ratio as 186 State Finance Concurrence has already been obtained
Chairman asked why the irrigation cost per hectare is so high The representative from the Govt of Maharashtra replied that the project is basically a lift irrigation scheme As such the irrigation cost per hectare is high
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should be completed by March 2014 and no further timecost overrun would be considered by the Committee
8 Rengali Irrigation Sub-project LBC-II (Revised-Major) Orissa
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Rengali Irrigation Sub-project LBC-II Orissa was earlier considered and accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 65th meeting held on 14696 for Rs 70515 at 1995 price level Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment clearance to this project in July 1997 for providing irrigation to CCA of 93501 ha with 90 intensity of irrigation
The proposal envisages completion of all works of Left Bank Canal from 30 km to 141 km with head discharge of 13222 cumec to irrigate the CCA of 93501 ha
()
The present proposal is a revised cost estimate and there is no change in the scope of the project The revised cost has been finalized in CWC for Rs 195834 crore at 2009-10 price level with BC ratio as 1986 State Finance concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-V)
Secretary (WR) obseNed that work programme is too lengthy As such he desired that the work schedule should be revised in such a way that the project should be completed by March 2015 It was also decided that no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject to the aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
9 Kachnoda Dam project (Revised-Major) Uttar Pradesh
CE (PLlO) cwe briefly introduced the project proposal Kachnoda dam project was considered and accepted in the 87th TAC meeting held on 17112006 Planning Commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal in Jan 2007 for Rs 8867 crore at 2004 price level for providing irrigation to 11 699 ha of CCA and annual irrigation to the tune of 10850 ha
The project envisages construction of following main components
a) 41 km long and 16 m high earthen dam with a live storage of 5464 Million Cubic Metre
b) An ogee shaped masonry spillway of 127 m length with 9 nos vertical gates of size 12 x 71 m each to pass maximum flood discharge of 6038 cumec
c) Left main canal of length 154 km with head discharge of 3 cumec and Right main canal of length 84 km with head discharge of 275 cumec with their distribution systems to provide irrigation to an area of 5173 ha of CCA
d) Apart from above irrigation facilities to 6096 ha under existing Lalitpur canal system and 430 ha under existing Dilwara distributory of Jamni canal are also proposed to be brought under command of Kachnoda dam project
The present revised cost estimate is without change in scope and the revised cost has been finalized for Rs 42345 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 109 State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-VI) Chairman observed that BC ratio of the project proposal is very marginal but keeping the chronic drought prone area of command the proposal may be accepted subject to the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject tothe aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
7
10 Flood protection works to Brahmani-Kelua-Birupa Doab of Brahmani system (Flood Control) Orissa
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood protection to provide protection to 17100 area in Jaipur district of Orissa The proposal
a) Raising and strengthening of existing embankments -8649km
b) Construction of new embankment at - 1583 km
c) Construction of spurs - 24 Nos
d) Renovation of drains - 3750 km
e) Construction of sluices 10 Nos
f) Construction of launching aprons - 2000 m
g) Construction service roads 56 km
The cost of the scheme has been finalized by CWC for Rs 6232 crore at price level with BC ratio as 1 The State Finance Concurrence has
been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VII) On query related to provision of launching aprons it was clarified by Project officials that there would provision of the aprons where are considered essential It was further informed by the project authority that project was formulated on the of model study carried out by 11 Chennai
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should completed by March 2013 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
11 Revised Project Estimate for construction of Right Marginal Bund on river Ganga from Bhogpur to Balawali (Flood Control) Dist Haridwar Uttarakhand
CE (PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 40460 persons and provide protection to 9000 ha land in 10 villages of Uttarakhand from the fury of flood
scheme was originally sanctioned for Rs 11 crore for providing protection along river Ganga in a length of 205 km Due to cost escalation only 105 m of embankment is being constructed by the Gov with 11 crore as earlier approved The scheme is an ongoing under Management Programme MoWR The Empowered Committee in July 2009 decided that the cost of the scheme may allowed to revise the price level of March 2008
The present proposal envisages Construction of embankment of remaining 10 km length in a stretch of the river from 105 km 205
8
The present revised estimate of flood control scheme has been examined in GFCC and finalized for Rs 2069 crore with BC ratio as 509 The State Finance Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VIII) Commissioner (Ganga) advised the Govt of Uttarakhand to send scheme-wise budget allocation for project in question
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
12 Scheme for Desilting of river Ichamati along the common Border portion for better drainage and flood management (Flood Control) West Bengal
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 984 lakhs and to provide protection of 225 sq km area The proposal envisages
a) Desilting of river Ichamati by means of suitable floating type excavator mounted on pontoon (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 15 28000 cum)
b) Desilting of river Ichamati by manual labour within clmr land and depositing the excavated earth at suitable distance (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 139000 cum)
c) Total length of excavationdesilting is 20415 km
GFCC has finalized the cost of the project for Rs 3823 crore with BC ratio as 637 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IX)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with Vote of thanks to the Chair
9
Annexure-l 10sth Meeting of Advisory Committee
bull LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
fVembers of the Committee
SI ShriMrs 1 UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair 2 Allanya Ray Financial Advisor Ministry of Water Resources Member 3 Avinash Misbra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Planning Member
Commission) 4 Saidul Haq Hydrologist ( Representing Chairh1an CGWB) Member 5 JSBawa Director (HPampI) CEA (Representing Centra Electricity Member
Authority) () S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO cwe New D~lhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees a Ministry of water Resources
7 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MoWR b) Central vVater Commission
~ R C lha Member (RM) CWC New Delhi lty Jndra Raj Member (WPampP) 10 ~ K lYOlhi Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi II S K Chaudhary Chief Engineer (FM) ewc New Delhi 12 T S Patil Chid Engineer (MCO) CWC Nagpur
deg1 3 M K Sinha Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New Delhi 14 BG Kaushik Chief Engineer (PPO) CWC New Delhi 15 V K Chawla Chief Engineer (lMO) CWC New Delhi 10 Y K Sharma Chief Engineer (IBO) cwe Chandigarh 17 KN Keslui Chief Engineer (LGBO) CWC Patna 1~ G S Tyagi Director UTampSS CWC New Delhi 19 Gorakh Thakur Director CA-l CWC New Delhi 20 Ajay KumarDirector PA (N) cwe New Delhi 2L D M Raipure Dixector Appraisal CWC Nagpur -
22 P C ]ha Director PA-C CWC New Delhi middot -lt
4-middotM middot ~ 23 R K Kanodia Director PA-S CWC New Delhi
24 M W Paunikar DD PA-N CWC New Delhi 25 B Rai DD PA-C CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC 26 AK GanjuChairman GFCC Patna 27 S Masood Husain Member (Planning) GFCC Patna
d) State Governmenofficers Bihar
28 Ajay Nayak PriRcipal Secretary WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 29 SiJsil Kumar Singh SE WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 30 P K lha Resident Engineer Govt of Bihar
Chattisgarh 31 B K Rai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur 32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
middot33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur 34 BK Pndey AE Bilaspur
Chattisgarh
3~~~ BKRai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur
32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur
34 B K Pndey A E Bilaspur
Madhya Pradesh F
35 KN Agarwal Member Engineering NVDA Bhopal ~ KC Chauhan Chief Engineer Lower Narmada Projects Indore 37 OPJadhau Chief Engineer Rani Awauli Baisugar Project Bayi Hills
Jabalpur 38 PN Sharma Executive Engineer Man Project Division
Maharashtra
39 HK Tonpe Chief Engineer Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 40 VR Bhure SE Jalgaon Irrigation Project Jalgaon 41 CS Modak ED Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 42 SN Patil Executive Engineer Jalgaon
Orissa
43 DK Das Additional Secretary WRD Govt of Orissa Bhubaneswar
M Harish ChBehera Engineer-in-Chief Water Resources Bhubaneswar
45 Chakradhar Mohnta CEampBM Brahmani Lfet Basin Angul
~ Basudev Mohapatra SE Eastern Circle Cuttak
47 Gopal Krishna Behera EE OECF Divn VIBhuban
~ Subrat Das EE Jaraka Irrigation Divn Jaraka
Uttar Pradesh
49 S Ahmad Engineer-in- Chief Irrigation Deptt
50 SP Singh SE Irrigation Deptt
51 Avinash Misra AE ICD-ILalipur
52 AKNiranjan AE ICD-IIILalipur
Uattarkhand
53 Rajeev Gupta Principal Secretary Govt of Uttarakhand Dehradun
~ AK Dinker SE Irrigation Works Circle Dehradun
55 DD Dalal EE Dehradun
West Bengal
~ TK Ghosh Chief Engineer IampW Deptt Kolkata West Bengal
57 S Konar Se Greater Kolkata Drainage Circle West Bengal
~ltcl (bullbull M2~Vlimikillgal~(hi~middot7 20 j 0shy
G~t cf CihOl WjlCr tsrmiddottlrCcs j)cplitmellt
Fron Fr Aji~ i(UlH-l Sarnjya
~---
loinl S-rtlilf (ngiwcril)~)
ro Sri 0 Thkw [iii ~Itp A-~1
Centrill ~atcr ( onunissm W7 (~-rl )tli BhltlwaJl l~ K -la1f1 New D~thi
lt ~r
Prtn1 diil0d r 6 q20 10
S~Lgt S~te f jlli[tCf CQnCUlTc je for rc3lotat ion work (If Elll (t~rn G)JldHJlaquo_~ltid Systcm (MltiurKRcvi~-d) fsihar
1 Ref- Yo~~r leu no n p2TOI )middotPA(lli 14~lti) dilW tj-(c2(JO
~
Dcnr Sir I ino (11 uin(te~l (I) coves tL tiliwial CIiC1rCnc~ r~ ll 1stumt1olt ()r
q)rk of Ea5lcr~Gmi~ Caxal S)MI~nt Cv1~iol l(evis~d) Dihur coHting H3 6)4 n (W(~
~Hx Hundr()(J Eil~htyF(hl Omiddotm amp Se~mly J~i~~illakh) under rUJ Il1tkr CClltrall)~Ji
~dlHn~ ( 00 Cclrl~ A ~~str~
Co)Pf )f prxc~(~3 Jf FlHpoc~rd Ccrlfllj~e (iS1 Srbcme) OOVrtlJI1(J)( or 13 Uli1 i~ Cl1(ued for rjity rcI~ltlle $
Th~a ~ [0] )0) ~ llG ironnniol1 ar l nm ~~fll ~ctir)1
En()IIr A alxmiddotyc
i
~ rr
j L0-shy
XOW3 failltfui ly te~ ~~~ --P A---i-~r- --( shyV V ~ ~TI ~
(Ajit Kur1gtr Silhniyar) I
Joilt Se(fct~i nlbii-~e(e)
I
J i ~ middot kl If middot shy~ ~ I
( ~ 4- bull bull
~
~ ~ ( J
~~ 1 1
I
middotr ti bull~ 0 middot [
~~~~~
~ ~ tmiddot
amp
) t i
rI
i k ~~ ~
r ~_ r~ It- ~ -r ~ --~oolt_ _ bull _ ll 1 -- ~ ~- a U -nT
n)~~ ~ ~ lmiddot bull ( I 1 it toO l i 1
I bullbullbullfy ( -1 ~- A1J ~ 1 ) ~ ~~ If ~ A I J ~
~ ~~ i j ~ t ] ~ t -+J
Jro)lllt ti tTl bull - 4 li 1 ~ J
lICT cf~InN l1nlf1r ~imp~
~Jl ir)~llr ft1P_~ T~r~
ifgtLJi ltP If 3) V Tr-(J_I) 1 ~1--21 oon ~rt1~~rr11rltLI 00 2010 )In
~Q ~f1lQm
r14l middot~I ~rz MI ~mu~~ lnf[lf middot)~Q~IttJ~ (poundPc)
[q7~- t~QTm11 Itl~ f ftllmr~r~I~(i3q)cr~qt tPl tlt~~r i6fnIlT I$~~i lrmfl ~ Rlf~lr ~ji~ill~~II (iIll q~l ~l~~m u~IW61~ ~4li~hJ I
~~t- ~~ ~r~r qjq~ w~5li 1 ~t-O21J0(l ~cI~[lF $liqj 1fUl02010 --0(J--gt bull
~Vlaquo mmf 1~~r31Jgt f~) til 1~irHlU~ ~il~rltillli~~fr qiT lifiiTJ J1lt1~ ltt tV3( W1rltlr W RfF~~fT ti iffit~r Qi11l ~ ~ 1fJ1 V (fj~)~ (i 1ifl ~ ~~ r
~l 71Rt T1T~) tt WTWj(f) $1 ~~ltr~tITtra J~II~(l ~netT ftT ~r H wrr ~m f1 fir ~16-rr r ~ -rRfgt -i~it r~ ~1 Ii1~jii 11 middotR1~rtr mn Glom ltmr~1 lt~ T~rl ~~ -xi) 2252
iil~ r~ -ltltir-- qrlt em i11tft1 qtllr 3Ii I1~r -iI middot~tmx 1tVn tj~r AlfJP l~ 3i~h1 r
~~ r-~ KI ~rFl qA ~lImiddoti-eltl r~1 in0- iv~ III i gt
t~
2 1iWf-n ~t 0300 (~h$rlt Ulfit1 ~q 7500 ~IH1r T~l i~il 15eOJ t-qtm ~rl 14 ~nf1Hltm ftjqr~ ~HlTfltlTI t I ~ middotf
ltflit tmlrT f~llllqQ j1 m~~l ~~ODI) 10 ~~ ~i P)~ ojlt ~(li) ~ 3(~) tfJ
Jfjlaquor tllWiI ltP) n~~~T tlIltpfn ~ WIf ~q ~irif ~r-~~(~ J~~IO~Qjil1011 ifil ~l ~1 tll) q(rn flTljlif ilipf ~rr~lT filj([ 3Jri IfltH mr4 lfll~ middotltlVImiddot l rt1j~1 TllJfll u)jlJOrm WfTUf-tl-f ~nt1q q~ ftrrr ~Jll~1 I - ~~i~
It ~rJnun- rlgt~ll IIE-IT Illllr - - (~ Ff - lorTI r 1lll-r lIT lt1-tT l IIIt)f II ~il~ IQC1(middot tli iYJ ctmiddot 11~ -- OJ J ~~~ middot~ I1 r )i
4Tfucq -t r~ trqri ~H ~~(i~lr xd (ll r 7iicjllf(oJl cltH 3rtii~ ~mur ri ~~ frml-r 111ci~1IRtji ~iTn ~UTfj~~~~ flq~i lUr 1IM-T6 I rr
u rhmiddot~rirr qj[ r-lt~iyenil~ 11( 1 -Wu-v ~~~1Jtmiddot~OO lr(~ Qf~~F~rll (Gn~IJFH) cii bullbulltI bull
bull rt- f1 n-~ ~ I i n -]
G f4-m fltMFT um ~lil lt~r if~U41 1~J-- i4~))if i-~ flfW-lIO ftjrltfgt 24GfliJ 0 IrJ ~~ ~~f( l1GI1 ltJi tnl ~ I
7 ~IfT ltliT fniJittTIU -(Hi if r11U 61 lLlJ f)nH ii1~1J JI~~rn -~~j~ I -g1 ltojflF[ ur -Jh 1 1it ~ h I ~
ol-t fl( q Ir ~ middot 0 ~
J~)() tmfuPTI ~ IlJ1Ill1U 6- ll middot(l
~ll ~t~IrIffi~~---- -gt --0 ~ ~~ - ~- ~~~-lt-~ -~ ~
n middot -r-~- i--
- ~ (-ill~ 1~~r gt-) (~ ~ ~
middotlfli~ iI~
fd mfllHmiddotlipli11 ~ n~ 1S1ml ~Gl1Jmiddot 4
l-fImiddottvHrd L ) t ~ gt11 I ~I ~i ~~ltirfl 1iOf-~ ampwr -~I I ~ ~ lo-~ r yC- ~
1( ~ ~ ~
~~ a~ r
bull ~
I tJltt-J Iic ~ l~~J 12L13 12 ~Lk Lmiddot I+i Iii 6 ~bt( ~LI
lt ~~h 1middot~middot_b~ - y~
~
I lJ~lt IncPJtl ltJ~ ill ~(~~) R-c2f-rJVr I ~1~1J~ ~Ih l-lLI1hll middotb~)llJC~1pound2 cl~~~ CD ~middotlgtJl) ~till (pound)
I ~~-ltd~~JLllLUC ~tt~poundQ(tl8bullil)JJl1-l812 tamplt (Z) 1~middotJJLlJthJ~~tmiddotJtllt~~~f-I=CII~ lJ~JitBh~ (~)
- ~t(JI(jK
JLlttlD ~ll~I~~1 ~~ln i2~u
middotL~~llci middot J~(JiILlt
~1~Hc ll0
(12 ~~Lt lSb ~I)_ middot 1
I (
I ~ h)Jdl~ JlllIg Ilyen~~t lj ~ Jc~19-h ~ ltlpll~ ~
tlJJ~ltQ ~~J ~~ ~S pound6S89 tD~f2 ~Q-tilliP~l5-JJ) ~cQ JJJf-iJll ~Li llii2
I ~0~l~tillt ~-hl kPJL lltJli)Jll~ ~ ~ 7-l1 l-~
Hg~ Qhlh
RJ~t1t ~jJJlil ~l0
C~U~~~) ~~~ LJ K ~
toozm J-wJvt1-~hlt~ii~-middotihb)ik~
LtlJt~t HJ~ lJ-lh l2t-th 1~JjlrTl~li mh
-----_- q -=- bull-~- -
-)l~i ~~ middotf bull bull bull ~ J ~_ _ _ __ bull bull
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
~ 18 Commissioner (Ganga) Ministry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Secretary Water Resources Department Government of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan
20
2l
22
23
24
25
26
27 28 29 30
31 32
33
Patna-800 015 Principal Secretary Water Resources Department Government of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya Arera Hills Bhopal Secretary (Water Resources) Government of Chhattisgarh DK Bhawan Sachivalaya Raipur-492 010 Chhattisgarh Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary (Irrigation amp Power) Government of Uttaranchal Sachivalaya Dehradun-248 001 (Uttarakhand) Secretary (Water Resources) Government of Orissa Secretariat Bhubaneshwarshy751 001 (Orissa) Secretary Irrigation amp Waterways Directorate Government of West Bengal Writers Building Kolkata-700 00 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New Delhi Chief Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi Chief Engineer Monitoring- Central CWC CGO complex Seminary Hills Nagpur Chief Engineer (NBO)CWC Paryawas Bhawan Mother Teresa Marg Arera Hills Bhopal-4620 11
Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177 - B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 (Bihar) Chief Engineer (VIER) Mahanadi amp Eastern Rivers CWC Plot No 655 Sahid Nagar Bhubneshwar - 751007 (Orissa) Chief Engineer (UGB) Upper Ganga Basin CWC Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira Nagar Lucknow- 226024 (Uttar Pradesh)
Copy for information to 34 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources Room No-407 Ilew Delhi
1051hSUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI
25thPURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON JUNE 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNO-ECONOMIC VIABILlT OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 105111 meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposa ls was held on 25062010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting It was observed that the representatives trom the Ministry of Agriculture Tribal Affairs and Environment amp Forest were not present in the meeting This was viewed seriously by the Chairman and accordingly it was advised to issue necessary directives to these Ministries to depute their representatives in the meetings of the Advisory Committee ill future
Thereafter the Chairman requested the Member-Secretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 104TH MEETING
104th The Summary Record of Discussions of the Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA (N)960-993 dated 21052010 Member-Secretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summarv Record of discussions of the 104th Advisory Committee meeting J
il) PROJECT PROPOSALS PUT UP FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
1 Restoration Works of Eastern Gandak Canal (Revised-Major) Bihar
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Restoration works of Eastern Gandak Canal an ERM scheme was accorded investment clearance by the Planning Commission in May 2004 for Rs 294 Cr at 2001 PL to restore CCA of 48 lakh ha and annual irrigation of 662 lakh ha This will provide irrigation facilities to East Champaran West Champaran Vaishali and Muzaffarpur districts
The present proposal envisages restoration and replacement of 10 components
a) Restoration of designed section of canal by desilting (Eastern Tirhut Main canal having length of 240 78 km 11 branchsub-~ranch canals having length 421 08 km 24 distributaries of 131 km length 132 sub distributaries of 1052 km length 424 minors and 1342 sub-minors)
b) Repairs to Gandak brarrage and its appurtenances c) Replacement of all the damaged structures with new ones
d) Renovation of all the pucca works like lining etc and structures to increase their longevity
e) Construction of few additional structures as per present site condition in line with approval of the Govt of Bihar
f) LOPE lining in selected reaches in high filling zones to avoid possibility of seepage
g) Brick tile lining in the selected canal reaches where earthwork has already been completed
hbull bull J Repar of damaged hydraulic gates in canal structures i) Constructionrepair of outlets at suitable locations j) Installations of telecommunication system for operation of canal
procurementdocumentation of technical records Preparation of manual for canal operation and water management PIM implementation for ascertaining assured irrigation to the beneficiaries and maintenance and operation of the canal through the beneficiaries
Apart from aboveworks following emergent works are also included in the present p(oposal
a) Restoration of mechanical work of barrage appurtenants as suggested by CWC
b) Restoration and strengthening of Cross-Drainage (CD) work at RD 29300 of Triveni Branch canal across Koraina river which includes construction of all bank connections construction of damaged canal trough and river training works for diversion of river streams
The present revised cost estimate without change in scope has been finalized for Rs 68478 cr at 2009-PL with BC ratio as 296 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
The project was discussed in length Member (WPampP) informed that the project is not included under AIBP It was informed by Principal Secretary Govt of Bihar that the construction work has already been started and it will be completed by March 2013 It was further informed by Govt of Bihar that during construction the closure of the existing canal would be done during rabi season only
Planning Commission informed that CGWB has been carrying out studies of conjunctive use for addressing the problem of water logging in the Gandak canal command area falling between Gandak and Burhi Gandak rivers
Chairman desired that the submission of CGWB report may be expedited by the Govt of Bihar and suggested to take remedial measures for water logged area based on recommendations of CGWB It was also advised to explore the possibility of increasing CCA through conjunctive use of ground and surface water in the command
After discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
2
Kharung Project (Major ERM-New) Chhattisgarh
CE (PAO) CWC gave a brief account of project Kharung Tank is an old completed med tank constructed during year 1 1930
across Kharung river a tributary of Sheonath river in Mahanadi system in Bilaspur district of Chhattisgarh state
Kharung k project is very old project and canal has been providing since the last years During period
only minor maintenance has As a result conditions of project components been over time reby causing gradual in seepage
present proposal envisages only the provIsion of concrete lining in its distribution system remodeling of structures in order and provide irrigation for additional 15 from water thus saved
project proposal envisages construction the following main works
i)
ji)
mm cement concrete lining along with low density poly film of 1 micron thickness the bed as well as on
for a total length 110 km of main canal and respective distribution system Re-modellingrepairing of District Road
iii) IV)
v) vi)
Re-modellingrepairing Head Regulators regulators etc Re-modellingrepairing of falls (16 Nos) in Main canals and its distributaries and Minors Nos) Re-modellingrepairing of in Main (4 Nos) Re-modellingrepairing of DrainageDrainage SyphonsAcqueduct Nos in Main canals amp 21 in distributaries and Minors)
price cost of with BC ratio as
been finalized 309
Rs 10104 crore2008-09 Concurrence been
obtained (copy as Annexure-III)
After brief discussion the Committee proposal
Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERM-New) Chhattisgarh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the proposal The iyari Tank project is an old completed tank constructed during the 1 1930 across Maniyari river a tributary of Sheonath river in Mahanadi system in Bilaspur district Chhattisgarh
present proposal is only for provIsion cement concrete lining in canal and its distribution and remodeling of existing structures to
3
save seepage water and thus to provide irrigation for additional 11000 ha in 32 villages without affecting any parameter of the reservoir
The cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 15995 crore at 2008-09 price level with BC ratio as 181
The Chairman enquired that while computing BC ratio of the project why the old project cost has not been taken into consideration The Project Authorities replied that being an old project the depreciation of the project is too high to consider As a result the impact on BC ratio would be negligible The Chairman suggested for conjunctive utilization of suriace and ground water in the command area so as to reduce the impact of water logging
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that the project may be deferred for reconsideration in the next meeting
4 Halon Irrigation Project (New Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC gave a brief account of the project proposal The Halon Irrigation Project envisages construction of a composite dam near village Karanjiya in the district of Mandia of Madhya Pradesh across river Halon a tributary of river Burne in Narmada basin The Halon Irrigation Project contemplates to provide annual irrigation facilities to an area of 16782 ha (CCA - 13040 ha) in Mandla district a tribal district of Madhya Pradesh The project will irrigate land on the left bank through gravity flow canal
84thThe project was earlier considered in the meeting of Advisory Committee held on 12052005 and was deferred for want of final environmental clearance clearance of RampR plan clearance from CGWB and in the absence of site specific discharge data to review the yield
The Chairman enquired about the status of statutory clearances of the project The Project Authorities replied that all the requisite statutory clearances from Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) Ministry of Environment amp Forest (MoEF) and clearance from CGWB have now been obtained As regards forest clearance it was informed by the Project officials that stage-1 clearance has been obtained and the work will be started after stage-2 clearance
The representative from CEA enquired regarding the provision of Hydroshypower generation in the project The Project Authorities mentioned that provision of Hydro-power generation was not found viable as per the site conditions The Chairman enquired about why the BC ratio of the project is very marginal ie 155 The Project Authorities replied that the command area of the project falls in Mandla district a tribal area in Madhya Pradesh As such the BC ratio is well within the permissible limits The State Finance Concurrence has been received
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
4
5 Man Irrigation Project (Revised Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The original proposal was approved by the Planning Commission in June 1992 for Rs 44 10 cr at 1983 price level The present proposal is a revised cost estimate without any change in its scope and the cost has been finalized for Rs 24603 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 179 The expenditure incurred till March 2010 is 196 crore The State Finance Concurrence has already been received
Chairman enquired about the construction status of the project The Project Authorities replied that the dam and head works of the project had already been completed in 2006 and the canal system is already in operation since the last two years Only some residual works are to be completed by March 2012
Chairman suggested for conjunctive utilization of surface and ground water in the command area to reduce the impact of water logging in consultation with CGWB
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further cost time revision will be considered by the Committee
6 Upper Narmada Irrigation Project (New Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Upper Narmada Irrigation Project envisages construction of a composite dam of maximum height of 3380 m and total length of 212 km near village Shobhapur (Rinatola) of Dindori district of Madhya Pradesh The project contemplates to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 26622 ha annually in Annupur and Dindori districts of Madhya Pradesh Most of the beneficiaries from the project belong to Schedule Caste (SC) and Schedule Tribe (ST) categories
The project was considered in the 84 th meeting of Advisory Committee held on 1205 2005 and was deferred for want of environmental clearance and RampR clearance
The cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 68393 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 157 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IV)
Chairman enquired about the status of statutory clearances of the project The Project Authorities replied that all the requisite statutory clearances from Ministry of Tribal Affairs (lVIoTA) and Ministry of Environment amp Forest (MoEF) have now been obtained On query regarding the physical programme of the project the Project Authorities replied that the project works would be awarded on turn-key basis and would be completed by March 2015 The Chairman asked why the BC ratio of the project is marginal (153)
5
f The Project Authorities replied that the command area of the project falls
in Annupur amp Dindori districts a tribal area in Madhya Pradesh As such the BC ratio is well with in the permissible limits (1)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
7 Shelgaon Barrage Project (New-Medium) Maharashtra
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Shelgaon Barrage a medium irrigation project envisages construction of 41965 m long barrage across river Tapi in Tapi basin The project is located near village Shelgaon in the Jalgaon district of Maharashtra The project is planned to irrigate annually an area of 11318 ha (CCA-9589 ha) benefiting 19 villages of Jalgaon district
The project envisages construction of the following main components
i) A 419 65 m long barrage with 18 Nos of radial gates of size 1830 m x 1676m
ii) A 465 m long left side earthen embankment and 165 m long saddle earthen embankment with a top width of 75 m
iii) An intake well of size 3 m x 11 m and jack well of size 9 m x 24 m along with 5 Nos of VT pumps of 1400 HP
The estimated cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 44649 crore at 2008-09 price level with BC ratio as 186 State Finance Concurrence has already been obtained
Chairman asked why the irrigation cost per hectare is so high The representative from the Govt of Maharashtra replied that the project is basically a lift irrigation scheme As such the irrigation cost per hectare is high
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should be completed by March 2014 and no further timecost overrun would be considered by the Committee
8 Rengali Irrigation Sub-project LBC-II (Revised-Major) Orissa
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Rengali Irrigation Sub-project LBC-II Orissa was earlier considered and accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 65th meeting held on 14696 for Rs 70515 at 1995 price level Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment clearance to this project in July 1997 for providing irrigation to CCA of 93501 ha with 90 intensity of irrigation
The proposal envisages completion of all works of Left Bank Canal from 30 km to 141 km with head discharge of 13222 cumec to irrigate the CCA of 93501 ha
()
The present proposal is a revised cost estimate and there is no change in the scope of the project The revised cost has been finalized in CWC for Rs 195834 crore at 2009-10 price level with BC ratio as 1986 State Finance concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-V)
Secretary (WR) obseNed that work programme is too lengthy As such he desired that the work schedule should be revised in such a way that the project should be completed by March 2015 It was also decided that no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject to the aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
9 Kachnoda Dam project (Revised-Major) Uttar Pradesh
CE (PLlO) cwe briefly introduced the project proposal Kachnoda dam project was considered and accepted in the 87th TAC meeting held on 17112006 Planning Commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal in Jan 2007 for Rs 8867 crore at 2004 price level for providing irrigation to 11 699 ha of CCA and annual irrigation to the tune of 10850 ha
The project envisages construction of following main components
a) 41 km long and 16 m high earthen dam with a live storage of 5464 Million Cubic Metre
b) An ogee shaped masonry spillway of 127 m length with 9 nos vertical gates of size 12 x 71 m each to pass maximum flood discharge of 6038 cumec
c) Left main canal of length 154 km with head discharge of 3 cumec and Right main canal of length 84 km with head discharge of 275 cumec with their distribution systems to provide irrigation to an area of 5173 ha of CCA
d) Apart from above irrigation facilities to 6096 ha under existing Lalitpur canal system and 430 ha under existing Dilwara distributory of Jamni canal are also proposed to be brought under command of Kachnoda dam project
The present revised cost estimate is without change in scope and the revised cost has been finalized for Rs 42345 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 109 State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-VI) Chairman observed that BC ratio of the project proposal is very marginal but keeping the chronic drought prone area of command the proposal may be accepted subject to the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject tothe aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
7
10 Flood protection works to Brahmani-Kelua-Birupa Doab of Brahmani system (Flood Control) Orissa
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood protection to provide protection to 17100 area in Jaipur district of Orissa The proposal
a) Raising and strengthening of existing embankments -8649km
b) Construction of new embankment at - 1583 km
c) Construction of spurs - 24 Nos
d) Renovation of drains - 3750 km
e) Construction of sluices 10 Nos
f) Construction of launching aprons - 2000 m
g) Construction service roads 56 km
The cost of the scheme has been finalized by CWC for Rs 6232 crore at price level with BC ratio as 1 The State Finance Concurrence has
been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VII) On query related to provision of launching aprons it was clarified by Project officials that there would provision of the aprons where are considered essential It was further informed by the project authority that project was formulated on the of model study carried out by 11 Chennai
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should completed by March 2013 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
11 Revised Project Estimate for construction of Right Marginal Bund on river Ganga from Bhogpur to Balawali (Flood Control) Dist Haridwar Uttarakhand
CE (PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 40460 persons and provide protection to 9000 ha land in 10 villages of Uttarakhand from the fury of flood
scheme was originally sanctioned for Rs 11 crore for providing protection along river Ganga in a length of 205 km Due to cost escalation only 105 m of embankment is being constructed by the Gov with 11 crore as earlier approved The scheme is an ongoing under Management Programme MoWR The Empowered Committee in July 2009 decided that the cost of the scheme may allowed to revise the price level of March 2008
The present proposal envisages Construction of embankment of remaining 10 km length in a stretch of the river from 105 km 205
8
The present revised estimate of flood control scheme has been examined in GFCC and finalized for Rs 2069 crore with BC ratio as 509 The State Finance Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VIII) Commissioner (Ganga) advised the Govt of Uttarakhand to send scheme-wise budget allocation for project in question
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
12 Scheme for Desilting of river Ichamati along the common Border portion for better drainage and flood management (Flood Control) West Bengal
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 984 lakhs and to provide protection of 225 sq km area The proposal envisages
a) Desilting of river Ichamati by means of suitable floating type excavator mounted on pontoon (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 15 28000 cum)
b) Desilting of river Ichamati by manual labour within clmr land and depositing the excavated earth at suitable distance (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 139000 cum)
c) Total length of excavationdesilting is 20415 km
GFCC has finalized the cost of the project for Rs 3823 crore with BC ratio as 637 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IX)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with Vote of thanks to the Chair
9
Annexure-l 10sth Meeting of Advisory Committee
bull LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
fVembers of the Committee
SI ShriMrs 1 UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair 2 Allanya Ray Financial Advisor Ministry of Water Resources Member 3 Avinash Misbra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Planning Member
Commission) 4 Saidul Haq Hydrologist ( Representing Chairh1an CGWB) Member 5 JSBawa Director (HPampI) CEA (Representing Centra Electricity Member
Authority) () S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO cwe New D~lhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees a Ministry of water Resources
7 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MoWR b) Central vVater Commission
~ R C lha Member (RM) CWC New Delhi lty Jndra Raj Member (WPampP) 10 ~ K lYOlhi Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi II S K Chaudhary Chief Engineer (FM) ewc New Delhi 12 T S Patil Chid Engineer (MCO) CWC Nagpur
deg1 3 M K Sinha Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New Delhi 14 BG Kaushik Chief Engineer (PPO) CWC New Delhi 15 V K Chawla Chief Engineer (lMO) CWC New Delhi 10 Y K Sharma Chief Engineer (IBO) cwe Chandigarh 17 KN Keslui Chief Engineer (LGBO) CWC Patna 1~ G S Tyagi Director UTampSS CWC New Delhi 19 Gorakh Thakur Director CA-l CWC New Delhi 20 Ajay KumarDirector PA (N) cwe New Delhi 2L D M Raipure Dixector Appraisal CWC Nagpur -
22 P C ]ha Director PA-C CWC New Delhi middot -lt
4-middotM middot ~ 23 R K Kanodia Director PA-S CWC New Delhi
24 M W Paunikar DD PA-N CWC New Delhi 25 B Rai DD PA-C CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC 26 AK GanjuChairman GFCC Patna 27 S Masood Husain Member (Planning) GFCC Patna
d) State Governmenofficers Bihar
28 Ajay Nayak PriRcipal Secretary WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 29 SiJsil Kumar Singh SE WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 30 P K lha Resident Engineer Govt of Bihar
Chattisgarh 31 B K Rai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur 32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
middot33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur 34 BK Pndey AE Bilaspur
Chattisgarh
3~~~ BKRai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur
32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur
34 B K Pndey A E Bilaspur
Madhya Pradesh F
35 KN Agarwal Member Engineering NVDA Bhopal ~ KC Chauhan Chief Engineer Lower Narmada Projects Indore 37 OPJadhau Chief Engineer Rani Awauli Baisugar Project Bayi Hills
Jabalpur 38 PN Sharma Executive Engineer Man Project Division
Maharashtra
39 HK Tonpe Chief Engineer Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 40 VR Bhure SE Jalgaon Irrigation Project Jalgaon 41 CS Modak ED Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 42 SN Patil Executive Engineer Jalgaon
Orissa
43 DK Das Additional Secretary WRD Govt of Orissa Bhubaneswar
M Harish ChBehera Engineer-in-Chief Water Resources Bhubaneswar
45 Chakradhar Mohnta CEampBM Brahmani Lfet Basin Angul
~ Basudev Mohapatra SE Eastern Circle Cuttak
47 Gopal Krishna Behera EE OECF Divn VIBhuban
~ Subrat Das EE Jaraka Irrigation Divn Jaraka
Uttar Pradesh
49 S Ahmad Engineer-in- Chief Irrigation Deptt
50 SP Singh SE Irrigation Deptt
51 Avinash Misra AE ICD-ILalipur
52 AKNiranjan AE ICD-IIILalipur
Uattarkhand
53 Rajeev Gupta Principal Secretary Govt of Uttarakhand Dehradun
~ AK Dinker SE Irrigation Works Circle Dehradun
55 DD Dalal EE Dehradun
West Bengal
~ TK Ghosh Chief Engineer IampW Deptt Kolkata West Bengal
57 S Konar Se Greater Kolkata Drainage Circle West Bengal
~ltcl (bullbull M2~Vlimikillgal~(hi~middot7 20 j 0shy
G~t cf CihOl WjlCr tsrmiddottlrCcs j)cplitmellt
Fron Fr Aji~ i(UlH-l Sarnjya
~---
loinl S-rtlilf (ngiwcril)~)
ro Sri 0 Thkw [iii ~Itp A-~1
Centrill ~atcr ( onunissm W7 (~-rl )tli BhltlwaJl l~ K -la1f1 New D~thi
lt ~r
Prtn1 diil0d r 6 q20 10
S~Lgt S~te f jlli[tCf CQnCUlTc je for rc3lotat ion work (If Elll (t~rn G)JldHJlaquo_~ltid Systcm (MltiurKRcvi~-d) fsihar
1 Ref- Yo~~r leu no n p2TOI )middotPA(lli 14~lti) dilW tj-(c2(JO
~
Dcnr Sir I ino (11 uin(te~l (I) coves tL tiliwial CIiC1rCnc~ r~ ll 1stumt1olt ()r
q)rk of Ea5lcr~Gmi~ Caxal S)MI~nt Cv1~iol l(evis~d) Dihur coHting H3 6)4 n (W(~
~Hx Hundr()(J Eil~htyF(hl Omiddotm amp Se~mly J~i~~illakh) under rUJ Il1tkr CClltrall)~Ji
~dlHn~ ( 00 Cclrl~ A ~~str~
Co)Pf )f prxc~(~3 Jf FlHpoc~rd Ccrlfllj~e (iS1 Srbcme) OOVrtlJI1(J)( or 13 Uli1 i~ Cl1(ued for rjity rcI~ltlle $
Th~a ~ [0] )0) ~ llG ironnniol1 ar l nm ~~fll ~ctir)1
En()IIr A alxmiddotyc
i
~ rr
j L0-shy
XOW3 failltfui ly te~ ~~~ --P A---i-~r- --( shyV V ~ ~TI ~
(Ajit Kur1gtr Silhniyar) I
Joilt Se(fct~i nlbii-~e(e)
I
J i ~ middot kl If middot shy~ ~ I
( ~ 4- bull bull
~
~ ~ ( J
~~ 1 1
I
middotr ti bull~ 0 middot [
~~~~~
~ ~ tmiddot
amp
) t i
rI
i k ~~ ~
r ~_ r~ It- ~ -r ~ --~oolt_ _ bull _ ll 1 -- ~ ~- a U -nT
n)~~ ~ ~ lmiddot bull ( I 1 it toO l i 1
I bullbullbullfy ( -1 ~- A1J ~ 1 ) ~ ~~ If ~ A I J ~
~ ~~ i j ~ t ] ~ t -+J
Jro)lllt ti tTl bull - 4 li 1 ~ J
lICT cf~InN l1nlf1r ~imp~
~Jl ir)~llr ft1P_~ T~r~
ifgtLJi ltP If 3) V Tr-(J_I) 1 ~1--21 oon ~rt1~~rr11rltLI 00 2010 )In
~Q ~f1lQm
r14l middot~I ~rz MI ~mu~~ lnf[lf middot)~Q~IttJ~ (poundPc)
[q7~- t~QTm11 Itl~ f ftllmr~r~I~(i3q)cr~qt tPl tlt~~r i6fnIlT I$~~i lrmfl ~ Rlf~lr ~ji~ill~~II (iIll q~l ~l~~m u~IW61~ ~4li~hJ I
~~t- ~~ ~r~r qjq~ w~5li 1 ~t-O21J0(l ~cI~[lF $liqj 1fUl02010 --0(J--gt bull
~Vlaquo mmf 1~~r31Jgt f~) til 1~irHlU~ ~il~rltillli~~fr qiT lifiiTJ J1lt1~ ltt tV3( W1rltlr W RfF~~fT ti iffit~r Qi11l ~ ~ 1fJ1 V (fj~)~ (i 1ifl ~ ~~ r
~l 71Rt T1T~) tt WTWj(f) $1 ~~ltr~tITtra J~II~(l ~netT ftT ~r H wrr ~m f1 fir ~16-rr r ~ -rRfgt -i~it r~ ~1 Ii1~jii 11 middotR1~rtr mn Glom ltmr~1 lt~ T~rl ~~ -xi) 2252
iil~ r~ -ltltir-- qrlt em i11tft1 qtllr 3Ii I1~r -iI middot~tmx 1tVn tj~r AlfJP l~ 3i~h1 r
~~ r-~ KI ~rFl qA ~lImiddoti-eltl r~1 in0- iv~ III i gt
t~
2 1iWf-n ~t 0300 (~h$rlt Ulfit1 ~q 7500 ~IH1r T~l i~il 15eOJ t-qtm ~rl 14 ~nf1Hltm ftjqr~ ~HlTfltlTI t I ~ middotf
ltflit tmlrT f~llllqQ j1 m~~l ~~ODI) 10 ~~ ~i P)~ ojlt ~(li) ~ 3(~) tfJ
Jfjlaquor tllWiI ltP) n~~~T tlIltpfn ~ WIf ~q ~irif ~r-~~(~ J~~IO~Qjil1011 ifil ~l ~1 tll) q(rn flTljlif ilipf ~rr~lT filj([ 3Jri IfltH mr4 lfll~ middotltlVImiddot l rt1j~1 TllJfll u)jlJOrm WfTUf-tl-f ~nt1q q~ ftrrr ~Jll~1 I - ~~i~
It ~rJnun- rlgt~ll IIE-IT Illllr - - (~ Ff - lorTI r 1lll-r lIT lt1-tT l IIIt)f II ~il~ IQC1(middot tli iYJ ctmiddot 11~ -- OJ J ~~~ middot~ I1 r )i
4Tfucq -t r~ trqri ~H ~~(i~lr xd (ll r 7iicjllf(oJl cltH 3rtii~ ~mur ri ~~ frml-r 111ci~1IRtji ~iTn ~UTfj~~~~ flq~i lUr 1IM-T6 I rr
u rhmiddot~rirr qj[ r-lt~iyenil~ 11( 1 -Wu-v ~~~1Jtmiddot~OO lr(~ Qf~~F~rll (Gn~IJFH) cii bullbulltI bull
bull rt- f1 n-~ ~ I i n -]
G f4-m fltMFT um ~lil lt~r if~U41 1~J-- i4~))if i-~ flfW-lIO ftjrltfgt 24GfliJ 0 IrJ ~~ ~~f( l1GI1 ltJi tnl ~ I
7 ~IfT ltliT fniJittTIU -(Hi if r11U 61 lLlJ f)nH ii1~1J JI~~rn -~~j~ I -g1 ltojflF[ ur -Jh 1 1it ~ h I ~
ol-t fl( q Ir ~ middot 0 ~
J~)() tmfuPTI ~ IlJ1Ill1U 6- ll middot(l
~ll ~t~IrIffi~~---- -gt --0 ~ ~~ - ~- ~~~-lt-~ -~ ~
n middot -r-~- i--
- ~ (-ill~ 1~~r gt-) (~ ~ ~
middotlfli~ iI~
fd mfllHmiddotlipli11 ~ n~ 1S1ml ~Gl1Jmiddot 4
l-fImiddottvHrd L ) t ~ gt11 I ~I ~i ~~ltirfl 1iOf-~ ampwr -~I I ~ ~ lo-~ r yC- ~
1( ~ ~ ~
~~ a~ r
bull ~
I tJltt-J Iic ~ l~~J 12L13 12 ~Lk Lmiddot I+i Iii 6 ~bt( ~LI
lt ~~h 1middot~middot_b~ - y~
~
I lJ~lt IncPJtl ltJ~ ill ~(~~) R-c2f-rJVr I ~1~1J~ ~Ih l-lLI1hll middotb~)llJC~1pound2 cl~~~ CD ~middotlgtJl) ~till (pound)
I ~~-ltd~~JLllLUC ~tt~poundQ(tl8bullil)JJl1-l812 tamplt (Z) 1~middotJJLlJthJ~~tmiddotJtllt~~~f-I=CII~ lJ~JitBh~ (~)
- ~t(JI(jK
JLlttlD ~ll~I~~1 ~~ln i2~u
middotL~~llci middot J~(JiILlt
~1~Hc ll0
(12 ~~Lt lSb ~I)_ middot 1
I (
I ~ h)Jdl~ JlllIg Ilyen~~t lj ~ Jc~19-h ~ ltlpll~ ~
tlJJ~ltQ ~~J ~~ ~S pound6S89 tD~f2 ~Q-tilliP~l5-JJ) ~cQ JJJf-iJll ~Li llii2
I ~0~l~tillt ~-hl kPJL lltJli)Jll~ ~ ~ 7-l1 l-~
Hg~ Qhlh
RJ~t1t ~jJJlil ~l0
C~U~~~) ~~~ LJ K ~
toozm J-wJvt1-~hlt~ii~-middotihb)ik~
LtlJt~t HJ~ lJ-lh l2t-th 1~JjlrTl~li mh
-----_- q -=- bull-~- -
-)l~i ~~ middotf bull bull bull ~ J ~_ _ _ __ bull bull
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
1051hSUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI
25thPURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON JUNE 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNO-ECONOMIC VIABILlT OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 105111 meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposa ls was held on 25062010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting It was observed that the representatives trom the Ministry of Agriculture Tribal Affairs and Environment amp Forest were not present in the meeting This was viewed seriously by the Chairman and accordingly it was advised to issue necessary directives to these Ministries to depute their representatives in the meetings of the Advisory Committee ill future
Thereafter the Chairman requested the Member-Secretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 104TH MEETING
104th The Summary Record of Discussions of the Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA (N)960-993 dated 21052010 Member-Secretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summarv Record of discussions of the 104th Advisory Committee meeting J
il) PROJECT PROPOSALS PUT UP FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
1 Restoration Works of Eastern Gandak Canal (Revised-Major) Bihar
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Restoration works of Eastern Gandak Canal an ERM scheme was accorded investment clearance by the Planning Commission in May 2004 for Rs 294 Cr at 2001 PL to restore CCA of 48 lakh ha and annual irrigation of 662 lakh ha This will provide irrigation facilities to East Champaran West Champaran Vaishali and Muzaffarpur districts
The present proposal envisages restoration and replacement of 10 components
a) Restoration of designed section of canal by desilting (Eastern Tirhut Main canal having length of 240 78 km 11 branchsub-~ranch canals having length 421 08 km 24 distributaries of 131 km length 132 sub distributaries of 1052 km length 424 minors and 1342 sub-minors)
b) Repairs to Gandak brarrage and its appurtenances c) Replacement of all the damaged structures with new ones
d) Renovation of all the pucca works like lining etc and structures to increase their longevity
e) Construction of few additional structures as per present site condition in line with approval of the Govt of Bihar
f) LOPE lining in selected reaches in high filling zones to avoid possibility of seepage
g) Brick tile lining in the selected canal reaches where earthwork has already been completed
hbull bull J Repar of damaged hydraulic gates in canal structures i) Constructionrepair of outlets at suitable locations j) Installations of telecommunication system for operation of canal
procurementdocumentation of technical records Preparation of manual for canal operation and water management PIM implementation for ascertaining assured irrigation to the beneficiaries and maintenance and operation of the canal through the beneficiaries
Apart from aboveworks following emergent works are also included in the present p(oposal
a) Restoration of mechanical work of barrage appurtenants as suggested by CWC
b) Restoration and strengthening of Cross-Drainage (CD) work at RD 29300 of Triveni Branch canal across Koraina river which includes construction of all bank connections construction of damaged canal trough and river training works for diversion of river streams
The present revised cost estimate without change in scope has been finalized for Rs 68478 cr at 2009-PL with BC ratio as 296 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
The project was discussed in length Member (WPampP) informed that the project is not included under AIBP It was informed by Principal Secretary Govt of Bihar that the construction work has already been started and it will be completed by March 2013 It was further informed by Govt of Bihar that during construction the closure of the existing canal would be done during rabi season only
Planning Commission informed that CGWB has been carrying out studies of conjunctive use for addressing the problem of water logging in the Gandak canal command area falling between Gandak and Burhi Gandak rivers
Chairman desired that the submission of CGWB report may be expedited by the Govt of Bihar and suggested to take remedial measures for water logged area based on recommendations of CGWB It was also advised to explore the possibility of increasing CCA through conjunctive use of ground and surface water in the command
After discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
2
Kharung Project (Major ERM-New) Chhattisgarh
CE (PAO) CWC gave a brief account of project Kharung Tank is an old completed med tank constructed during year 1 1930
across Kharung river a tributary of Sheonath river in Mahanadi system in Bilaspur district of Chhattisgarh state
Kharung k project is very old project and canal has been providing since the last years During period
only minor maintenance has As a result conditions of project components been over time reby causing gradual in seepage
present proposal envisages only the provIsion of concrete lining in its distribution system remodeling of structures in order and provide irrigation for additional 15 from water thus saved
project proposal envisages construction the following main works
i)
ji)
mm cement concrete lining along with low density poly film of 1 micron thickness the bed as well as on
for a total length 110 km of main canal and respective distribution system Re-modellingrepairing of District Road
iii) IV)
v) vi)
Re-modellingrepairing Head Regulators regulators etc Re-modellingrepairing of falls (16 Nos) in Main canals and its distributaries and Minors Nos) Re-modellingrepairing of in Main (4 Nos) Re-modellingrepairing of DrainageDrainage SyphonsAcqueduct Nos in Main canals amp 21 in distributaries and Minors)
price cost of with BC ratio as
been finalized 309
Rs 10104 crore2008-09 Concurrence been
obtained (copy as Annexure-III)
After brief discussion the Committee proposal
Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERM-New) Chhattisgarh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the proposal The iyari Tank project is an old completed tank constructed during the 1 1930 across Maniyari river a tributary of Sheonath river in Mahanadi system in Bilaspur district Chhattisgarh
present proposal is only for provIsion cement concrete lining in canal and its distribution and remodeling of existing structures to
3
save seepage water and thus to provide irrigation for additional 11000 ha in 32 villages without affecting any parameter of the reservoir
The cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 15995 crore at 2008-09 price level with BC ratio as 181
The Chairman enquired that while computing BC ratio of the project why the old project cost has not been taken into consideration The Project Authorities replied that being an old project the depreciation of the project is too high to consider As a result the impact on BC ratio would be negligible The Chairman suggested for conjunctive utilization of suriace and ground water in the command area so as to reduce the impact of water logging
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that the project may be deferred for reconsideration in the next meeting
4 Halon Irrigation Project (New Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC gave a brief account of the project proposal The Halon Irrigation Project envisages construction of a composite dam near village Karanjiya in the district of Mandia of Madhya Pradesh across river Halon a tributary of river Burne in Narmada basin The Halon Irrigation Project contemplates to provide annual irrigation facilities to an area of 16782 ha (CCA - 13040 ha) in Mandla district a tribal district of Madhya Pradesh The project will irrigate land on the left bank through gravity flow canal
84thThe project was earlier considered in the meeting of Advisory Committee held on 12052005 and was deferred for want of final environmental clearance clearance of RampR plan clearance from CGWB and in the absence of site specific discharge data to review the yield
The Chairman enquired about the status of statutory clearances of the project The Project Authorities replied that all the requisite statutory clearances from Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) Ministry of Environment amp Forest (MoEF) and clearance from CGWB have now been obtained As regards forest clearance it was informed by the Project officials that stage-1 clearance has been obtained and the work will be started after stage-2 clearance
The representative from CEA enquired regarding the provision of Hydroshypower generation in the project The Project Authorities mentioned that provision of Hydro-power generation was not found viable as per the site conditions The Chairman enquired about why the BC ratio of the project is very marginal ie 155 The Project Authorities replied that the command area of the project falls in Mandla district a tribal area in Madhya Pradesh As such the BC ratio is well within the permissible limits The State Finance Concurrence has been received
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
4
5 Man Irrigation Project (Revised Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The original proposal was approved by the Planning Commission in June 1992 for Rs 44 10 cr at 1983 price level The present proposal is a revised cost estimate without any change in its scope and the cost has been finalized for Rs 24603 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 179 The expenditure incurred till March 2010 is 196 crore The State Finance Concurrence has already been received
Chairman enquired about the construction status of the project The Project Authorities replied that the dam and head works of the project had already been completed in 2006 and the canal system is already in operation since the last two years Only some residual works are to be completed by March 2012
Chairman suggested for conjunctive utilization of surface and ground water in the command area to reduce the impact of water logging in consultation with CGWB
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further cost time revision will be considered by the Committee
6 Upper Narmada Irrigation Project (New Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Upper Narmada Irrigation Project envisages construction of a composite dam of maximum height of 3380 m and total length of 212 km near village Shobhapur (Rinatola) of Dindori district of Madhya Pradesh The project contemplates to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 26622 ha annually in Annupur and Dindori districts of Madhya Pradesh Most of the beneficiaries from the project belong to Schedule Caste (SC) and Schedule Tribe (ST) categories
The project was considered in the 84 th meeting of Advisory Committee held on 1205 2005 and was deferred for want of environmental clearance and RampR clearance
The cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 68393 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 157 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IV)
Chairman enquired about the status of statutory clearances of the project The Project Authorities replied that all the requisite statutory clearances from Ministry of Tribal Affairs (lVIoTA) and Ministry of Environment amp Forest (MoEF) have now been obtained On query regarding the physical programme of the project the Project Authorities replied that the project works would be awarded on turn-key basis and would be completed by March 2015 The Chairman asked why the BC ratio of the project is marginal (153)
5
f The Project Authorities replied that the command area of the project falls
in Annupur amp Dindori districts a tribal area in Madhya Pradesh As such the BC ratio is well with in the permissible limits (1)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
7 Shelgaon Barrage Project (New-Medium) Maharashtra
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Shelgaon Barrage a medium irrigation project envisages construction of 41965 m long barrage across river Tapi in Tapi basin The project is located near village Shelgaon in the Jalgaon district of Maharashtra The project is planned to irrigate annually an area of 11318 ha (CCA-9589 ha) benefiting 19 villages of Jalgaon district
The project envisages construction of the following main components
i) A 419 65 m long barrage with 18 Nos of radial gates of size 1830 m x 1676m
ii) A 465 m long left side earthen embankment and 165 m long saddle earthen embankment with a top width of 75 m
iii) An intake well of size 3 m x 11 m and jack well of size 9 m x 24 m along with 5 Nos of VT pumps of 1400 HP
The estimated cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 44649 crore at 2008-09 price level with BC ratio as 186 State Finance Concurrence has already been obtained
Chairman asked why the irrigation cost per hectare is so high The representative from the Govt of Maharashtra replied that the project is basically a lift irrigation scheme As such the irrigation cost per hectare is high
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should be completed by March 2014 and no further timecost overrun would be considered by the Committee
8 Rengali Irrigation Sub-project LBC-II (Revised-Major) Orissa
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Rengali Irrigation Sub-project LBC-II Orissa was earlier considered and accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 65th meeting held on 14696 for Rs 70515 at 1995 price level Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment clearance to this project in July 1997 for providing irrigation to CCA of 93501 ha with 90 intensity of irrigation
The proposal envisages completion of all works of Left Bank Canal from 30 km to 141 km with head discharge of 13222 cumec to irrigate the CCA of 93501 ha
()
The present proposal is a revised cost estimate and there is no change in the scope of the project The revised cost has been finalized in CWC for Rs 195834 crore at 2009-10 price level with BC ratio as 1986 State Finance concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-V)
Secretary (WR) obseNed that work programme is too lengthy As such he desired that the work schedule should be revised in such a way that the project should be completed by March 2015 It was also decided that no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject to the aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
9 Kachnoda Dam project (Revised-Major) Uttar Pradesh
CE (PLlO) cwe briefly introduced the project proposal Kachnoda dam project was considered and accepted in the 87th TAC meeting held on 17112006 Planning Commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal in Jan 2007 for Rs 8867 crore at 2004 price level for providing irrigation to 11 699 ha of CCA and annual irrigation to the tune of 10850 ha
The project envisages construction of following main components
a) 41 km long and 16 m high earthen dam with a live storage of 5464 Million Cubic Metre
b) An ogee shaped masonry spillway of 127 m length with 9 nos vertical gates of size 12 x 71 m each to pass maximum flood discharge of 6038 cumec
c) Left main canal of length 154 km with head discharge of 3 cumec and Right main canal of length 84 km with head discharge of 275 cumec with their distribution systems to provide irrigation to an area of 5173 ha of CCA
d) Apart from above irrigation facilities to 6096 ha under existing Lalitpur canal system and 430 ha under existing Dilwara distributory of Jamni canal are also proposed to be brought under command of Kachnoda dam project
The present revised cost estimate is without change in scope and the revised cost has been finalized for Rs 42345 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 109 State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-VI) Chairman observed that BC ratio of the project proposal is very marginal but keeping the chronic drought prone area of command the proposal may be accepted subject to the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject tothe aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
7
10 Flood protection works to Brahmani-Kelua-Birupa Doab of Brahmani system (Flood Control) Orissa
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood protection to provide protection to 17100 area in Jaipur district of Orissa The proposal
a) Raising and strengthening of existing embankments -8649km
b) Construction of new embankment at - 1583 km
c) Construction of spurs - 24 Nos
d) Renovation of drains - 3750 km
e) Construction of sluices 10 Nos
f) Construction of launching aprons - 2000 m
g) Construction service roads 56 km
The cost of the scheme has been finalized by CWC for Rs 6232 crore at price level with BC ratio as 1 The State Finance Concurrence has
been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VII) On query related to provision of launching aprons it was clarified by Project officials that there would provision of the aprons where are considered essential It was further informed by the project authority that project was formulated on the of model study carried out by 11 Chennai
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should completed by March 2013 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
11 Revised Project Estimate for construction of Right Marginal Bund on river Ganga from Bhogpur to Balawali (Flood Control) Dist Haridwar Uttarakhand
CE (PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 40460 persons and provide protection to 9000 ha land in 10 villages of Uttarakhand from the fury of flood
scheme was originally sanctioned for Rs 11 crore for providing protection along river Ganga in a length of 205 km Due to cost escalation only 105 m of embankment is being constructed by the Gov with 11 crore as earlier approved The scheme is an ongoing under Management Programme MoWR The Empowered Committee in July 2009 decided that the cost of the scheme may allowed to revise the price level of March 2008
The present proposal envisages Construction of embankment of remaining 10 km length in a stretch of the river from 105 km 205
8
The present revised estimate of flood control scheme has been examined in GFCC and finalized for Rs 2069 crore with BC ratio as 509 The State Finance Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VIII) Commissioner (Ganga) advised the Govt of Uttarakhand to send scheme-wise budget allocation for project in question
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
12 Scheme for Desilting of river Ichamati along the common Border portion for better drainage and flood management (Flood Control) West Bengal
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 984 lakhs and to provide protection of 225 sq km area The proposal envisages
a) Desilting of river Ichamati by means of suitable floating type excavator mounted on pontoon (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 15 28000 cum)
b) Desilting of river Ichamati by manual labour within clmr land and depositing the excavated earth at suitable distance (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 139000 cum)
c) Total length of excavationdesilting is 20415 km
GFCC has finalized the cost of the project for Rs 3823 crore with BC ratio as 637 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IX)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with Vote of thanks to the Chair
9
Annexure-l 10sth Meeting of Advisory Committee
bull LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
fVembers of the Committee
SI ShriMrs 1 UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair 2 Allanya Ray Financial Advisor Ministry of Water Resources Member 3 Avinash Misbra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Planning Member
Commission) 4 Saidul Haq Hydrologist ( Representing Chairh1an CGWB) Member 5 JSBawa Director (HPampI) CEA (Representing Centra Electricity Member
Authority) () S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO cwe New D~lhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees a Ministry of water Resources
7 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MoWR b) Central vVater Commission
~ R C lha Member (RM) CWC New Delhi lty Jndra Raj Member (WPampP) 10 ~ K lYOlhi Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi II S K Chaudhary Chief Engineer (FM) ewc New Delhi 12 T S Patil Chid Engineer (MCO) CWC Nagpur
deg1 3 M K Sinha Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New Delhi 14 BG Kaushik Chief Engineer (PPO) CWC New Delhi 15 V K Chawla Chief Engineer (lMO) CWC New Delhi 10 Y K Sharma Chief Engineer (IBO) cwe Chandigarh 17 KN Keslui Chief Engineer (LGBO) CWC Patna 1~ G S Tyagi Director UTampSS CWC New Delhi 19 Gorakh Thakur Director CA-l CWC New Delhi 20 Ajay KumarDirector PA (N) cwe New Delhi 2L D M Raipure Dixector Appraisal CWC Nagpur -
22 P C ]ha Director PA-C CWC New Delhi middot -lt
4-middotM middot ~ 23 R K Kanodia Director PA-S CWC New Delhi
24 M W Paunikar DD PA-N CWC New Delhi 25 B Rai DD PA-C CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC 26 AK GanjuChairman GFCC Patna 27 S Masood Husain Member (Planning) GFCC Patna
d) State Governmenofficers Bihar
28 Ajay Nayak PriRcipal Secretary WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 29 SiJsil Kumar Singh SE WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 30 P K lha Resident Engineer Govt of Bihar
Chattisgarh 31 B K Rai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur 32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
middot33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur 34 BK Pndey AE Bilaspur
Chattisgarh
3~~~ BKRai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur
32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur
34 B K Pndey A E Bilaspur
Madhya Pradesh F
35 KN Agarwal Member Engineering NVDA Bhopal ~ KC Chauhan Chief Engineer Lower Narmada Projects Indore 37 OPJadhau Chief Engineer Rani Awauli Baisugar Project Bayi Hills
Jabalpur 38 PN Sharma Executive Engineer Man Project Division
Maharashtra
39 HK Tonpe Chief Engineer Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 40 VR Bhure SE Jalgaon Irrigation Project Jalgaon 41 CS Modak ED Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 42 SN Patil Executive Engineer Jalgaon
Orissa
43 DK Das Additional Secretary WRD Govt of Orissa Bhubaneswar
M Harish ChBehera Engineer-in-Chief Water Resources Bhubaneswar
45 Chakradhar Mohnta CEampBM Brahmani Lfet Basin Angul
~ Basudev Mohapatra SE Eastern Circle Cuttak
47 Gopal Krishna Behera EE OECF Divn VIBhuban
~ Subrat Das EE Jaraka Irrigation Divn Jaraka
Uttar Pradesh
49 S Ahmad Engineer-in- Chief Irrigation Deptt
50 SP Singh SE Irrigation Deptt
51 Avinash Misra AE ICD-ILalipur
52 AKNiranjan AE ICD-IIILalipur
Uattarkhand
53 Rajeev Gupta Principal Secretary Govt of Uttarakhand Dehradun
~ AK Dinker SE Irrigation Works Circle Dehradun
55 DD Dalal EE Dehradun
West Bengal
~ TK Ghosh Chief Engineer IampW Deptt Kolkata West Bengal
57 S Konar Se Greater Kolkata Drainage Circle West Bengal
~ltcl (bullbull M2~Vlimikillgal~(hi~middot7 20 j 0shy
G~t cf CihOl WjlCr tsrmiddottlrCcs j)cplitmellt
Fron Fr Aji~ i(UlH-l Sarnjya
~---
loinl S-rtlilf (ngiwcril)~)
ro Sri 0 Thkw [iii ~Itp A-~1
Centrill ~atcr ( onunissm W7 (~-rl )tli BhltlwaJl l~ K -la1f1 New D~thi
lt ~r
Prtn1 diil0d r 6 q20 10
S~Lgt S~te f jlli[tCf CQnCUlTc je for rc3lotat ion work (If Elll (t~rn G)JldHJlaquo_~ltid Systcm (MltiurKRcvi~-d) fsihar
1 Ref- Yo~~r leu no n p2TOI )middotPA(lli 14~lti) dilW tj-(c2(JO
~
Dcnr Sir I ino (11 uin(te~l (I) coves tL tiliwial CIiC1rCnc~ r~ ll 1stumt1olt ()r
q)rk of Ea5lcr~Gmi~ Caxal S)MI~nt Cv1~iol l(evis~d) Dihur coHting H3 6)4 n (W(~
~Hx Hundr()(J Eil~htyF(hl Omiddotm amp Se~mly J~i~~illakh) under rUJ Il1tkr CClltrall)~Ji
~dlHn~ ( 00 Cclrl~ A ~~str~
Co)Pf )f prxc~(~3 Jf FlHpoc~rd Ccrlfllj~e (iS1 Srbcme) OOVrtlJI1(J)( or 13 Uli1 i~ Cl1(ued for rjity rcI~ltlle $
Th~a ~ [0] )0) ~ llG ironnniol1 ar l nm ~~fll ~ctir)1
En()IIr A alxmiddotyc
i
~ rr
j L0-shy
XOW3 failltfui ly te~ ~~~ --P A---i-~r- --( shyV V ~ ~TI ~
(Ajit Kur1gtr Silhniyar) I
Joilt Se(fct~i nlbii-~e(e)
I
J i ~ middot kl If middot shy~ ~ I
( ~ 4- bull bull
~
~ ~ ( J
~~ 1 1
I
middotr ti bull~ 0 middot [
~~~~~
~ ~ tmiddot
amp
) t i
rI
i k ~~ ~
r ~_ r~ It- ~ -r ~ --~oolt_ _ bull _ ll 1 -- ~ ~- a U -nT
n)~~ ~ ~ lmiddot bull ( I 1 it toO l i 1
I bullbullbullfy ( -1 ~- A1J ~ 1 ) ~ ~~ If ~ A I J ~
~ ~~ i j ~ t ] ~ t -+J
Jro)lllt ti tTl bull - 4 li 1 ~ J
lICT cf~InN l1nlf1r ~imp~
~Jl ir)~llr ft1P_~ T~r~
ifgtLJi ltP If 3) V Tr-(J_I) 1 ~1--21 oon ~rt1~~rr11rltLI 00 2010 )In
~Q ~f1lQm
r14l middot~I ~rz MI ~mu~~ lnf[lf middot)~Q~IttJ~ (poundPc)
[q7~- t~QTm11 Itl~ f ftllmr~r~I~(i3q)cr~qt tPl tlt~~r i6fnIlT I$~~i lrmfl ~ Rlf~lr ~ji~ill~~II (iIll q~l ~l~~m u~IW61~ ~4li~hJ I
~~t- ~~ ~r~r qjq~ w~5li 1 ~t-O21J0(l ~cI~[lF $liqj 1fUl02010 --0(J--gt bull
~Vlaquo mmf 1~~r31Jgt f~) til 1~irHlU~ ~il~rltillli~~fr qiT lifiiTJ J1lt1~ ltt tV3( W1rltlr W RfF~~fT ti iffit~r Qi11l ~ ~ 1fJ1 V (fj~)~ (i 1ifl ~ ~~ r
~l 71Rt T1T~) tt WTWj(f) $1 ~~ltr~tITtra J~II~(l ~netT ftT ~r H wrr ~m f1 fir ~16-rr r ~ -rRfgt -i~it r~ ~1 Ii1~jii 11 middotR1~rtr mn Glom ltmr~1 lt~ T~rl ~~ -xi) 2252
iil~ r~ -ltltir-- qrlt em i11tft1 qtllr 3Ii I1~r -iI middot~tmx 1tVn tj~r AlfJP l~ 3i~h1 r
~~ r-~ KI ~rFl qA ~lImiddoti-eltl r~1 in0- iv~ III i gt
t~
2 1iWf-n ~t 0300 (~h$rlt Ulfit1 ~q 7500 ~IH1r T~l i~il 15eOJ t-qtm ~rl 14 ~nf1Hltm ftjqr~ ~HlTfltlTI t I ~ middotf
ltflit tmlrT f~llllqQ j1 m~~l ~~ODI) 10 ~~ ~i P)~ ojlt ~(li) ~ 3(~) tfJ
Jfjlaquor tllWiI ltP) n~~~T tlIltpfn ~ WIf ~q ~irif ~r-~~(~ J~~IO~Qjil1011 ifil ~l ~1 tll) q(rn flTljlif ilipf ~rr~lT filj([ 3Jri IfltH mr4 lfll~ middotltlVImiddot l rt1j~1 TllJfll u)jlJOrm WfTUf-tl-f ~nt1q q~ ftrrr ~Jll~1 I - ~~i~
It ~rJnun- rlgt~ll IIE-IT Illllr - - (~ Ff - lorTI r 1lll-r lIT lt1-tT l IIIt)f II ~il~ IQC1(middot tli iYJ ctmiddot 11~ -- OJ J ~~~ middot~ I1 r )i
4Tfucq -t r~ trqri ~H ~~(i~lr xd (ll r 7iicjllf(oJl cltH 3rtii~ ~mur ri ~~ frml-r 111ci~1IRtji ~iTn ~UTfj~~~~ flq~i lUr 1IM-T6 I rr
u rhmiddot~rirr qj[ r-lt~iyenil~ 11( 1 -Wu-v ~~~1Jtmiddot~OO lr(~ Qf~~F~rll (Gn~IJFH) cii bullbulltI bull
bull rt- f1 n-~ ~ I i n -]
G f4-m fltMFT um ~lil lt~r if~U41 1~J-- i4~))if i-~ flfW-lIO ftjrltfgt 24GfliJ 0 IrJ ~~ ~~f( l1GI1 ltJi tnl ~ I
7 ~IfT ltliT fniJittTIU -(Hi if r11U 61 lLlJ f)nH ii1~1J JI~~rn -~~j~ I -g1 ltojflF[ ur -Jh 1 1it ~ h I ~
ol-t fl( q Ir ~ middot 0 ~
J~)() tmfuPTI ~ IlJ1Ill1U 6- ll middot(l
~ll ~t~IrIffi~~---- -gt --0 ~ ~~ - ~- ~~~-lt-~ -~ ~
n middot -r-~- i--
- ~ (-ill~ 1~~r gt-) (~ ~ ~
middotlfli~ iI~
fd mfllHmiddotlipli11 ~ n~ 1S1ml ~Gl1Jmiddot 4
l-fImiddottvHrd L ) t ~ gt11 I ~I ~i ~~ltirfl 1iOf-~ ampwr -~I I ~ ~ lo-~ r yC- ~
1( ~ ~ ~
~~ a~ r
bull ~
I tJltt-J Iic ~ l~~J 12L13 12 ~Lk Lmiddot I+i Iii 6 ~bt( ~LI
lt ~~h 1middot~middot_b~ - y~
~
I lJ~lt IncPJtl ltJ~ ill ~(~~) R-c2f-rJVr I ~1~1J~ ~Ih l-lLI1hll middotb~)llJC~1pound2 cl~~~ CD ~middotlgtJl) ~till (pound)
I ~~-ltd~~JLllLUC ~tt~poundQ(tl8bullil)JJl1-l812 tamplt (Z) 1~middotJJLlJthJ~~tmiddotJtllt~~~f-I=CII~ lJ~JitBh~ (~)
- ~t(JI(jK
JLlttlD ~ll~I~~1 ~~ln i2~u
middotL~~llci middot J~(JiILlt
~1~Hc ll0
(12 ~~Lt lSb ~I)_ middot 1
I (
I ~ h)Jdl~ JlllIg Ilyen~~t lj ~ Jc~19-h ~ ltlpll~ ~
tlJJ~ltQ ~~J ~~ ~S pound6S89 tD~f2 ~Q-tilliP~l5-JJ) ~cQ JJJf-iJll ~Li llii2
I ~0~l~tillt ~-hl kPJL lltJli)Jll~ ~ ~ 7-l1 l-~
Hg~ Qhlh
RJ~t1t ~jJJlil ~l0
C~U~~~) ~~~ LJ K ~
toozm J-wJvt1-~hlt~ii~-middotihb)ik~
LtlJt~t HJ~ lJ-lh l2t-th 1~JjlrTl~li mh
-----_- q -=- bull-~- -
-)l~i ~~ middotf bull bull bull ~ J ~_ _ _ __ bull bull
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
d) Renovation of all the pucca works like lining etc and structures to increase their longevity
e) Construction of few additional structures as per present site condition in line with approval of the Govt of Bihar
f) LOPE lining in selected reaches in high filling zones to avoid possibility of seepage
g) Brick tile lining in the selected canal reaches where earthwork has already been completed
hbull bull J Repar of damaged hydraulic gates in canal structures i) Constructionrepair of outlets at suitable locations j) Installations of telecommunication system for operation of canal
procurementdocumentation of technical records Preparation of manual for canal operation and water management PIM implementation for ascertaining assured irrigation to the beneficiaries and maintenance and operation of the canal through the beneficiaries
Apart from aboveworks following emergent works are also included in the present p(oposal
a) Restoration of mechanical work of barrage appurtenants as suggested by CWC
b) Restoration and strengthening of Cross-Drainage (CD) work at RD 29300 of Triveni Branch canal across Koraina river which includes construction of all bank connections construction of damaged canal trough and river training works for diversion of river streams
The present revised cost estimate without change in scope has been finalized for Rs 68478 cr at 2009-PL with BC ratio as 296 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
The project was discussed in length Member (WPampP) informed that the project is not included under AIBP It was informed by Principal Secretary Govt of Bihar that the construction work has already been started and it will be completed by March 2013 It was further informed by Govt of Bihar that during construction the closure of the existing canal would be done during rabi season only
Planning Commission informed that CGWB has been carrying out studies of conjunctive use for addressing the problem of water logging in the Gandak canal command area falling between Gandak and Burhi Gandak rivers
Chairman desired that the submission of CGWB report may be expedited by the Govt of Bihar and suggested to take remedial measures for water logged area based on recommendations of CGWB It was also advised to explore the possibility of increasing CCA through conjunctive use of ground and surface water in the command
After discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
2
Kharung Project (Major ERM-New) Chhattisgarh
CE (PAO) CWC gave a brief account of project Kharung Tank is an old completed med tank constructed during year 1 1930
across Kharung river a tributary of Sheonath river in Mahanadi system in Bilaspur district of Chhattisgarh state
Kharung k project is very old project and canal has been providing since the last years During period
only minor maintenance has As a result conditions of project components been over time reby causing gradual in seepage
present proposal envisages only the provIsion of concrete lining in its distribution system remodeling of structures in order and provide irrigation for additional 15 from water thus saved
project proposal envisages construction the following main works
i)
ji)
mm cement concrete lining along with low density poly film of 1 micron thickness the bed as well as on
for a total length 110 km of main canal and respective distribution system Re-modellingrepairing of District Road
iii) IV)
v) vi)
Re-modellingrepairing Head Regulators regulators etc Re-modellingrepairing of falls (16 Nos) in Main canals and its distributaries and Minors Nos) Re-modellingrepairing of in Main (4 Nos) Re-modellingrepairing of DrainageDrainage SyphonsAcqueduct Nos in Main canals amp 21 in distributaries and Minors)
price cost of with BC ratio as
been finalized 309
Rs 10104 crore2008-09 Concurrence been
obtained (copy as Annexure-III)
After brief discussion the Committee proposal
Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERM-New) Chhattisgarh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the proposal The iyari Tank project is an old completed tank constructed during the 1 1930 across Maniyari river a tributary of Sheonath river in Mahanadi system in Bilaspur district Chhattisgarh
present proposal is only for provIsion cement concrete lining in canal and its distribution and remodeling of existing structures to
3
save seepage water and thus to provide irrigation for additional 11000 ha in 32 villages without affecting any parameter of the reservoir
The cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 15995 crore at 2008-09 price level with BC ratio as 181
The Chairman enquired that while computing BC ratio of the project why the old project cost has not been taken into consideration The Project Authorities replied that being an old project the depreciation of the project is too high to consider As a result the impact on BC ratio would be negligible The Chairman suggested for conjunctive utilization of suriace and ground water in the command area so as to reduce the impact of water logging
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that the project may be deferred for reconsideration in the next meeting
4 Halon Irrigation Project (New Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC gave a brief account of the project proposal The Halon Irrigation Project envisages construction of a composite dam near village Karanjiya in the district of Mandia of Madhya Pradesh across river Halon a tributary of river Burne in Narmada basin The Halon Irrigation Project contemplates to provide annual irrigation facilities to an area of 16782 ha (CCA - 13040 ha) in Mandla district a tribal district of Madhya Pradesh The project will irrigate land on the left bank through gravity flow canal
84thThe project was earlier considered in the meeting of Advisory Committee held on 12052005 and was deferred for want of final environmental clearance clearance of RampR plan clearance from CGWB and in the absence of site specific discharge data to review the yield
The Chairman enquired about the status of statutory clearances of the project The Project Authorities replied that all the requisite statutory clearances from Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) Ministry of Environment amp Forest (MoEF) and clearance from CGWB have now been obtained As regards forest clearance it was informed by the Project officials that stage-1 clearance has been obtained and the work will be started after stage-2 clearance
The representative from CEA enquired regarding the provision of Hydroshypower generation in the project The Project Authorities mentioned that provision of Hydro-power generation was not found viable as per the site conditions The Chairman enquired about why the BC ratio of the project is very marginal ie 155 The Project Authorities replied that the command area of the project falls in Mandla district a tribal area in Madhya Pradesh As such the BC ratio is well within the permissible limits The State Finance Concurrence has been received
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
4
5 Man Irrigation Project (Revised Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The original proposal was approved by the Planning Commission in June 1992 for Rs 44 10 cr at 1983 price level The present proposal is a revised cost estimate without any change in its scope and the cost has been finalized for Rs 24603 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 179 The expenditure incurred till March 2010 is 196 crore The State Finance Concurrence has already been received
Chairman enquired about the construction status of the project The Project Authorities replied that the dam and head works of the project had already been completed in 2006 and the canal system is already in operation since the last two years Only some residual works are to be completed by March 2012
Chairman suggested for conjunctive utilization of surface and ground water in the command area to reduce the impact of water logging in consultation with CGWB
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further cost time revision will be considered by the Committee
6 Upper Narmada Irrigation Project (New Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Upper Narmada Irrigation Project envisages construction of a composite dam of maximum height of 3380 m and total length of 212 km near village Shobhapur (Rinatola) of Dindori district of Madhya Pradesh The project contemplates to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 26622 ha annually in Annupur and Dindori districts of Madhya Pradesh Most of the beneficiaries from the project belong to Schedule Caste (SC) and Schedule Tribe (ST) categories
The project was considered in the 84 th meeting of Advisory Committee held on 1205 2005 and was deferred for want of environmental clearance and RampR clearance
The cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 68393 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 157 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IV)
Chairman enquired about the status of statutory clearances of the project The Project Authorities replied that all the requisite statutory clearances from Ministry of Tribal Affairs (lVIoTA) and Ministry of Environment amp Forest (MoEF) have now been obtained On query regarding the physical programme of the project the Project Authorities replied that the project works would be awarded on turn-key basis and would be completed by March 2015 The Chairman asked why the BC ratio of the project is marginal (153)
5
f The Project Authorities replied that the command area of the project falls
in Annupur amp Dindori districts a tribal area in Madhya Pradesh As such the BC ratio is well with in the permissible limits (1)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
7 Shelgaon Barrage Project (New-Medium) Maharashtra
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Shelgaon Barrage a medium irrigation project envisages construction of 41965 m long barrage across river Tapi in Tapi basin The project is located near village Shelgaon in the Jalgaon district of Maharashtra The project is planned to irrigate annually an area of 11318 ha (CCA-9589 ha) benefiting 19 villages of Jalgaon district
The project envisages construction of the following main components
i) A 419 65 m long barrage with 18 Nos of radial gates of size 1830 m x 1676m
ii) A 465 m long left side earthen embankment and 165 m long saddle earthen embankment with a top width of 75 m
iii) An intake well of size 3 m x 11 m and jack well of size 9 m x 24 m along with 5 Nos of VT pumps of 1400 HP
The estimated cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 44649 crore at 2008-09 price level with BC ratio as 186 State Finance Concurrence has already been obtained
Chairman asked why the irrigation cost per hectare is so high The representative from the Govt of Maharashtra replied that the project is basically a lift irrigation scheme As such the irrigation cost per hectare is high
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should be completed by March 2014 and no further timecost overrun would be considered by the Committee
8 Rengali Irrigation Sub-project LBC-II (Revised-Major) Orissa
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Rengali Irrigation Sub-project LBC-II Orissa was earlier considered and accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 65th meeting held on 14696 for Rs 70515 at 1995 price level Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment clearance to this project in July 1997 for providing irrigation to CCA of 93501 ha with 90 intensity of irrigation
The proposal envisages completion of all works of Left Bank Canal from 30 km to 141 km with head discharge of 13222 cumec to irrigate the CCA of 93501 ha
()
The present proposal is a revised cost estimate and there is no change in the scope of the project The revised cost has been finalized in CWC for Rs 195834 crore at 2009-10 price level with BC ratio as 1986 State Finance concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-V)
Secretary (WR) obseNed that work programme is too lengthy As such he desired that the work schedule should be revised in such a way that the project should be completed by March 2015 It was also decided that no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject to the aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
9 Kachnoda Dam project (Revised-Major) Uttar Pradesh
CE (PLlO) cwe briefly introduced the project proposal Kachnoda dam project was considered and accepted in the 87th TAC meeting held on 17112006 Planning Commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal in Jan 2007 for Rs 8867 crore at 2004 price level for providing irrigation to 11 699 ha of CCA and annual irrigation to the tune of 10850 ha
The project envisages construction of following main components
a) 41 km long and 16 m high earthen dam with a live storage of 5464 Million Cubic Metre
b) An ogee shaped masonry spillway of 127 m length with 9 nos vertical gates of size 12 x 71 m each to pass maximum flood discharge of 6038 cumec
c) Left main canal of length 154 km with head discharge of 3 cumec and Right main canal of length 84 km with head discharge of 275 cumec with their distribution systems to provide irrigation to an area of 5173 ha of CCA
d) Apart from above irrigation facilities to 6096 ha under existing Lalitpur canal system and 430 ha under existing Dilwara distributory of Jamni canal are also proposed to be brought under command of Kachnoda dam project
The present revised cost estimate is without change in scope and the revised cost has been finalized for Rs 42345 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 109 State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-VI) Chairman observed that BC ratio of the project proposal is very marginal but keeping the chronic drought prone area of command the proposal may be accepted subject to the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject tothe aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
7
10 Flood protection works to Brahmani-Kelua-Birupa Doab of Brahmani system (Flood Control) Orissa
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood protection to provide protection to 17100 area in Jaipur district of Orissa The proposal
a) Raising and strengthening of existing embankments -8649km
b) Construction of new embankment at - 1583 km
c) Construction of spurs - 24 Nos
d) Renovation of drains - 3750 km
e) Construction of sluices 10 Nos
f) Construction of launching aprons - 2000 m
g) Construction service roads 56 km
The cost of the scheme has been finalized by CWC for Rs 6232 crore at price level with BC ratio as 1 The State Finance Concurrence has
been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VII) On query related to provision of launching aprons it was clarified by Project officials that there would provision of the aprons where are considered essential It was further informed by the project authority that project was formulated on the of model study carried out by 11 Chennai
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should completed by March 2013 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
11 Revised Project Estimate for construction of Right Marginal Bund on river Ganga from Bhogpur to Balawali (Flood Control) Dist Haridwar Uttarakhand
CE (PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 40460 persons and provide protection to 9000 ha land in 10 villages of Uttarakhand from the fury of flood
scheme was originally sanctioned for Rs 11 crore for providing protection along river Ganga in a length of 205 km Due to cost escalation only 105 m of embankment is being constructed by the Gov with 11 crore as earlier approved The scheme is an ongoing under Management Programme MoWR The Empowered Committee in July 2009 decided that the cost of the scheme may allowed to revise the price level of March 2008
The present proposal envisages Construction of embankment of remaining 10 km length in a stretch of the river from 105 km 205
8
The present revised estimate of flood control scheme has been examined in GFCC and finalized for Rs 2069 crore with BC ratio as 509 The State Finance Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VIII) Commissioner (Ganga) advised the Govt of Uttarakhand to send scheme-wise budget allocation for project in question
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
12 Scheme for Desilting of river Ichamati along the common Border portion for better drainage and flood management (Flood Control) West Bengal
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 984 lakhs and to provide protection of 225 sq km area The proposal envisages
a) Desilting of river Ichamati by means of suitable floating type excavator mounted on pontoon (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 15 28000 cum)
b) Desilting of river Ichamati by manual labour within clmr land and depositing the excavated earth at suitable distance (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 139000 cum)
c) Total length of excavationdesilting is 20415 km
GFCC has finalized the cost of the project for Rs 3823 crore with BC ratio as 637 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IX)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with Vote of thanks to the Chair
9
Annexure-l 10sth Meeting of Advisory Committee
bull LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
fVembers of the Committee
SI ShriMrs 1 UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair 2 Allanya Ray Financial Advisor Ministry of Water Resources Member 3 Avinash Misbra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Planning Member
Commission) 4 Saidul Haq Hydrologist ( Representing Chairh1an CGWB) Member 5 JSBawa Director (HPampI) CEA (Representing Centra Electricity Member
Authority) () S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO cwe New D~lhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees a Ministry of water Resources
7 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MoWR b) Central vVater Commission
~ R C lha Member (RM) CWC New Delhi lty Jndra Raj Member (WPampP) 10 ~ K lYOlhi Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi II S K Chaudhary Chief Engineer (FM) ewc New Delhi 12 T S Patil Chid Engineer (MCO) CWC Nagpur
deg1 3 M K Sinha Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New Delhi 14 BG Kaushik Chief Engineer (PPO) CWC New Delhi 15 V K Chawla Chief Engineer (lMO) CWC New Delhi 10 Y K Sharma Chief Engineer (IBO) cwe Chandigarh 17 KN Keslui Chief Engineer (LGBO) CWC Patna 1~ G S Tyagi Director UTampSS CWC New Delhi 19 Gorakh Thakur Director CA-l CWC New Delhi 20 Ajay KumarDirector PA (N) cwe New Delhi 2L D M Raipure Dixector Appraisal CWC Nagpur -
22 P C ]ha Director PA-C CWC New Delhi middot -lt
4-middotM middot ~ 23 R K Kanodia Director PA-S CWC New Delhi
24 M W Paunikar DD PA-N CWC New Delhi 25 B Rai DD PA-C CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC 26 AK GanjuChairman GFCC Patna 27 S Masood Husain Member (Planning) GFCC Patna
d) State Governmenofficers Bihar
28 Ajay Nayak PriRcipal Secretary WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 29 SiJsil Kumar Singh SE WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 30 P K lha Resident Engineer Govt of Bihar
Chattisgarh 31 B K Rai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur 32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
middot33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur 34 BK Pndey AE Bilaspur
Chattisgarh
3~~~ BKRai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur
32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur
34 B K Pndey A E Bilaspur
Madhya Pradesh F
35 KN Agarwal Member Engineering NVDA Bhopal ~ KC Chauhan Chief Engineer Lower Narmada Projects Indore 37 OPJadhau Chief Engineer Rani Awauli Baisugar Project Bayi Hills
Jabalpur 38 PN Sharma Executive Engineer Man Project Division
Maharashtra
39 HK Tonpe Chief Engineer Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 40 VR Bhure SE Jalgaon Irrigation Project Jalgaon 41 CS Modak ED Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 42 SN Patil Executive Engineer Jalgaon
Orissa
43 DK Das Additional Secretary WRD Govt of Orissa Bhubaneswar
M Harish ChBehera Engineer-in-Chief Water Resources Bhubaneswar
45 Chakradhar Mohnta CEampBM Brahmani Lfet Basin Angul
~ Basudev Mohapatra SE Eastern Circle Cuttak
47 Gopal Krishna Behera EE OECF Divn VIBhuban
~ Subrat Das EE Jaraka Irrigation Divn Jaraka
Uttar Pradesh
49 S Ahmad Engineer-in- Chief Irrigation Deptt
50 SP Singh SE Irrigation Deptt
51 Avinash Misra AE ICD-ILalipur
52 AKNiranjan AE ICD-IIILalipur
Uattarkhand
53 Rajeev Gupta Principal Secretary Govt of Uttarakhand Dehradun
~ AK Dinker SE Irrigation Works Circle Dehradun
55 DD Dalal EE Dehradun
West Bengal
~ TK Ghosh Chief Engineer IampW Deptt Kolkata West Bengal
57 S Konar Se Greater Kolkata Drainage Circle West Bengal
~ltcl (bullbull M2~Vlimikillgal~(hi~middot7 20 j 0shy
G~t cf CihOl WjlCr tsrmiddottlrCcs j)cplitmellt
Fron Fr Aji~ i(UlH-l Sarnjya
~---
loinl S-rtlilf (ngiwcril)~)
ro Sri 0 Thkw [iii ~Itp A-~1
Centrill ~atcr ( onunissm W7 (~-rl )tli BhltlwaJl l~ K -la1f1 New D~thi
lt ~r
Prtn1 diil0d r 6 q20 10
S~Lgt S~te f jlli[tCf CQnCUlTc je for rc3lotat ion work (If Elll (t~rn G)JldHJlaquo_~ltid Systcm (MltiurKRcvi~-d) fsihar
1 Ref- Yo~~r leu no n p2TOI )middotPA(lli 14~lti) dilW tj-(c2(JO
~
Dcnr Sir I ino (11 uin(te~l (I) coves tL tiliwial CIiC1rCnc~ r~ ll 1stumt1olt ()r
q)rk of Ea5lcr~Gmi~ Caxal S)MI~nt Cv1~iol l(evis~d) Dihur coHting H3 6)4 n (W(~
~Hx Hundr()(J Eil~htyF(hl Omiddotm amp Se~mly J~i~~illakh) under rUJ Il1tkr CClltrall)~Ji
~dlHn~ ( 00 Cclrl~ A ~~str~
Co)Pf )f prxc~(~3 Jf FlHpoc~rd Ccrlfllj~e (iS1 Srbcme) OOVrtlJI1(J)( or 13 Uli1 i~ Cl1(ued for rjity rcI~ltlle $
Th~a ~ [0] )0) ~ llG ironnniol1 ar l nm ~~fll ~ctir)1
En()IIr A alxmiddotyc
i
~ rr
j L0-shy
XOW3 failltfui ly te~ ~~~ --P A---i-~r- --( shyV V ~ ~TI ~
(Ajit Kur1gtr Silhniyar) I
Joilt Se(fct~i nlbii-~e(e)
I
J i ~ middot kl If middot shy~ ~ I
( ~ 4- bull bull
~
~ ~ ( J
~~ 1 1
I
middotr ti bull~ 0 middot [
~~~~~
~ ~ tmiddot
amp
) t i
rI
i k ~~ ~
r ~_ r~ It- ~ -r ~ --~oolt_ _ bull _ ll 1 -- ~ ~- a U -nT
n)~~ ~ ~ lmiddot bull ( I 1 it toO l i 1
I bullbullbullfy ( -1 ~- A1J ~ 1 ) ~ ~~ If ~ A I J ~
~ ~~ i j ~ t ] ~ t -+J
Jro)lllt ti tTl bull - 4 li 1 ~ J
lICT cf~InN l1nlf1r ~imp~
~Jl ir)~llr ft1P_~ T~r~
ifgtLJi ltP If 3) V Tr-(J_I) 1 ~1--21 oon ~rt1~~rr11rltLI 00 2010 )In
~Q ~f1lQm
r14l middot~I ~rz MI ~mu~~ lnf[lf middot)~Q~IttJ~ (poundPc)
[q7~- t~QTm11 Itl~ f ftllmr~r~I~(i3q)cr~qt tPl tlt~~r i6fnIlT I$~~i lrmfl ~ Rlf~lr ~ji~ill~~II (iIll q~l ~l~~m u~IW61~ ~4li~hJ I
~~t- ~~ ~r~r qjq~ w~5li 1 ~t-O21J0(l ~cI~[lF $liqj 1fUl02010 --0(J--gt bull
~Vlaquo mmf 1~~r31Jgt f~) til 1~irHlU~ ~il~rltillli~~fr qiT lifiiTJ J1lt1~ ltt tV3( W1rltlr W RfF~~fT ti iffit~r Qi11l ~ ~ 1fJ1 V (fj~)~ (i 1ifl ~ ~~ r
~l 71Rt T1T~) tt WTWj(f) $1 ~~ltr~tITtra J~II~(l ~netT ftT ~r H wrr ~m f1 fir ~16-rr r ~ -rRfgt -i~it r~ ~1 Ii1~jii 11 middotR1~rtr mn Glom ltmr~1 lt~ T~rl ~~ -xi) 2252
iil~ r~ -ltltir-- qrlt em i11tft1 qtllr 3Ii I1~r -iI middot~tmx 1tVn tj~r AlfJP l~ 3i~h1 r
~~ r-~ KI ~rFl qA ~lImiddoti-eltl r~1 in0- iv~ III i gt
t~
2 1iWf-n ~t 0300 (~h$rlt Ulfit1 ~q 7500 ~IH1r T~l i~il 15eOJ t-qtm ~rl 14 ~nf1Hltm ftjqr~ ~HlTfltlTI t I ~ middotf
ltflit tmlrT f~llllqQ j1 m~~l ~~ODI) 10 ~~ ~i P)~ ojlt ~(li) ~ 3(~) tfJ
Jfjlaquor tllWiI ltP) n~~~T tlIltpfn ~ WIf ~q ~irif ~r-~~(~ J~~IO~Qjil1011 ifil ~l ~1 tll) q(rn flTljlif ilipf ~rr~lT filj([ 3Jri IfltH mr4 lfll~ middotltlVImiddot l rt1j~1 TllJfll u)jlJOrm WfTUf-tl-f ~nt1q q~ ftrrr ~Jll~1 I - ~~i~
It ~rJnun- rlgt~ll IIE-IT Illllr - - (~ Ff - lorTI r 1lll-r lIT lt1-tT l IIIt)f II ~il~ IQC1(middot tli iYJ ctmiddot 11~ -- OJ J ~~~ middot~ I1 r )i
4Tfucq -t r~ trqri ~H ~~(i~lr xd (ll r 7iicjllf(oJl cltH 3rtii~ ~mur ri ~~ frml-r 111ci~1IRtji ~iTn ~UTfj~~~~ flq~i lUr 1IM-T6 I rr
u rhmiddot~rirr qj[ r-lt~iyenil~ 11( 1 -Wu-v ~~~1Jtmiddot~OO lr(~ Qf~~F~rll (Gn~IJFH) cii bullbulltI bull
bull rt- f1 n-~ ~ I i n -]
G f4-m fltMFT um ~lil lt~r if~U41 1~J-- i4~))if i-~ flfW-lIO ftjrltfgt 24GfliJ 0 IrJ ~~ ~~f( l1GI1 ltJi tnl ~ I
7 ~IfT ltliT fniJittTIU -(Hi if r11U 61 lLlJ f)nH ii1~1J JI~~rn -~~j~ I -g1 ltojflF[ ur -Jh 1 1it ~ h I ~
ol-t fl( q Ir ~ middot 0 ~
J~)() tmfuPTI ~ IlJ1Ill1U 6- ll middot(l
~ll ~t~IrIffi~~---- -gt --0 ~ ~~ - ~- ~~~-lt-~ -~ ~
n middot -r-~- i--
- ~ (-ill~ 1~~r gt-) (~ ~ ~
middotlfli~ iI~
fd mfllHmiddotlipli11 ~ n~ 1S1ml ~Gl1Jmiddot 4
l-fImiddottvHrd L ) t ~ gt11 I ~I ~i ~~ltirfl 1iOf-~ ampwr -~I I ~ ~ lo-~ r yC- ~
1( ~ ~ ~
~~ a~ r
bull ~
I tJltt-J Iic ~ l~~J 12L13 12 ~Lk Lmiddot I+i Iii 6 ~bt( ~LI
lt ~~h 1middot~middot_b~ - y~
~
I lJ~lt IncPJtl ltJ~ ill ~(~~) R-c2f-rJVr I ~1~1J~ ~Ih l-lLI1hll middotb~)llJC~1pound2 cl~~~ CD ~middotlgtJl) ~till (pound)
I ~~-ltd~~JLllLUC ~tt~poundQ(tl8bullil)JJl1-l812 tamplt (Z) 1~middotJJLlJthJ~~tmiddotJtllt~~~f-I=CII~ lJ~JitBh~ (~)
- ~t(JI(jK
JLlttlD ~ll~I~~1 ~~ln i2~u
middotL~~llci middot J~(JiILlt
~1~Hc ll0
(12 ~~Lt lSb ~I)_ middot 1
I (
I ~ h)Jdl~ JlllIg Ilyen~~t lj ~ Jc~19-h ~ ltlpll~ ~
tlJJ~ltQ ~~J ~~ ~S pound6S89 tD~f2 ~Q-tilliP~l5-JJ) ~cQ JJJf-iJll ~Li llii2
I ~0~l~tillt ~-hl kPJL lltJli)Jll~ ~ ~ 7-l1 l-~
Hg~ Qhlh
RJ~t1t ~jJJlil ~l0
C~U~~~) ~~~ LJ K ~
toozm J-wJvt1-~hlt~ii~-middotihb)ik~
LtlJt~t HJ~ lJ-lh l2t-th 1~JjlrTl~li mh
-----_- q -=- bull-~- -
-)l~i ~~ middotf bull bull bull ~ J ~_ _ _ __ bull bull
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
Kharung Project (Major ERM-New) Chhattisgarh
CE (PAO) CWC gave a brief account of project Kharung Tank is an old completed med tank constructed during year 1 1930
across Kharung river a tributary of Sheonath river in Mahanadi system in Bilaspur district of Chhattisgarh state
Kharung k project is very old project and canal has been providing since the last years During period
only minor maintenance has As a result conditions of project components been over time reby causing gradual in seepage
present proposal envisages only the provIsion of concrete lining in its distribution system remodeling of structures in order and provide irrigation for additional 15 from water thus saved
project proposal envisages construction the following main works
i)
ji)
mm cement concrete lining along with low density poly film of 1 micron thickness the bed as well as on
for a total length 110 km of main canal and respective distribution system Re-modellingrepairing of District Road
iii) IV)
v) vi)
Re-modellingrepairing Head Regulators regulators etc Re-modellingrepairing of falls (16 Nos) in Main canals and its distributaries and Minors Nos) Re-modellingrepairing of in Main (4 Nos) Re-modellingrepairing of DrainageDrainage SyphonsAcqueduct Nos in Main canals amp 21 in distributaries and Minors)
price cost of with BC ratio as
been finalized 309
Rs 10104 crore2008-09 Concurrence been
obtained (copy as Annexure-III)
After brief discussion the Committee proposal
Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERM-New) Chhattisgarh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the proposal The iyari Tank project is an old completed tank constructed during the 1 1930 across Maniyari river a tributary of Sheonath river in Mahanadi system in Bilaspur district Chhattisgarh
present proposal is only for provIsion cement concrete lining in canal and its distribution and remodeling of existing structures to
3
save seepage water and thus to provide irrigation for additional 11000 ha in 32 villages without affecting any parameter of the reservoir
The cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 15995 crore at 2008-09 price level with BC ratio as 181
The Chairman enquired that while computing BC ratio of the project why the old project cost has not been taken into consideration The Project Authorities replied that being an old project the depreciation of the project is too high to consider As a result the impact on BC ratio would be negligible The Chairman suggested for conjunctive utilization of suriace and ground water in the command area so as to reduce the impact of water logging
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that the project may be deferred for reconsideration in the next meeting
4 Halon Irrigation Project (New Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC gave a brief account of the project proposal The Halon Irrigation Project envisages construction of a composite dam near village Karanjiya in the district of Mandia of Madhya Pradesh across river Halon a tributary of river Burne in Narmada basin The Halon Irrigation Project contemplates to provide annual irrigation facilities to an area of 16782 ha (CCA - 13040 ha) in Mandla district a tribal district of Madhya Pradesh The project will irrigate land on the left bank through gravity flow canal
84thThe project was earlier considered in the meeting of Advisory Committee held on 12052005 and was deferred for want of final environmental clearance clearance of RampR plan clearance from CGWB and in the absence of site specific discharge data to review the yield
The Chairman enquired about the status of statutory clearances of the project The Project Authorities replied that all the requisite statutory clearances from Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) Ministry of Environment amp Forest (MoEF) and clearance from CGWB have now been obtained As regards forest clearance it was informed by the Project officials that stage-1 clearance has been obtained and the work will be started after stage-2 clearance
The representative from CEA enquired regarding the provision of Hydroshypower generation in the project The Project Authorities mentioned that provision of Hydro-power generation was not found viable as per the site conditions The Chairman enquired about why the BC ratio of the project is very marginal ie 155 The Project Authorities replied that the command area of the project falls in Mandla district a tribal area in Madhya Pradesh As such the BC ratio is well within the permissible limits The State Finance Concurrence has been received
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
4
5 Man Irrigation Project (Revised Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The original proposal was approved by the Planning Commission in June 1992 for Rs 44 10 cr at 1983 price level The present proposal is a revised cost estimate without any change in its scope and the cost has been finalized for Rs 24603 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 179 The expenditure incurred till March 2010 is 196 crore The State Finance Concurrence has already been received
Chairman enquired about the construction status of the project The Project Authorities replied that the dam and head works of the project had already been completed in 2006 and the canal system is already in operation since the last two years Only some residual works are to be completed by March 2012
Chairman suggested for conjunctive utilization of surface and ground water in the command area to reduce the impact of water logging in consultation with CGWB
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further cost time revision will be considered by the Committee
6 Upper Narmada Irrigation Project (New Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Upper Narmada Irrigation Project envisages construction of a composite dam of maximum height of 3380 m and total length of 212 km near village Shobhapur (Rinatola) of Dindori district of Madhya Pradesh The project contemplates to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 26622 ha annually in Annupur and Dindori districts of Madhya Pradesh Most of the beneficiaries from the project belong to Schedule Caste (SC) and Schedule Tribe (ST) categories
The project was considered in the 84 th meeting of Advisory Committee held on 1205 2005 and was deferred for want of environmental clearance and RampR clearance
The cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 68393 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 157 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IV)
Chairman enquired about the status of statutory clearances of the project The Project Authorities replied that all the requisite statutory clearances from Ministry of Tribal Affairs (lVIoTA) and Ministry of Environment amp Forest (MoEF) have now been obtained On query regarding the physical programme of the project the Project Authorities replied that the project works would be awarded on turn-key basis and would be completed by March 2015 The Chairman asked why the BC ratio of the project is marginal (153)
5
f The Project Authorities replied that the command area of the project falls
in Annupur amp Dindori districts a tribal area in Madhya Pradesh As such the BC ratio is well with in the permissible limits (1)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
7 Shelgaon Barrage Project (New-Medium) Maharashtra
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Shelgaon Barrage a medium irrigation project envisages construction of 41965 m long barrage across river Tapi in Tapi basin The project is located near village Shelgaon in the Jalgaon district of Maharashtra The project is planned to irrigate annually an area of 11318 ha (CCA-9589 ha) benefiting 19 villages of Jalgaon district
The project envisages construction of the following main components
i) A 419 65 m long barrage with 18 Nos of radial gates of size 1830 m x 1676m
ii) A 465 m long left side earthen embankment and 165 m long saddle earthen embankment with a top width of 75 m
iii) An intake well of size 3 m x 11 m and jack well of size 9 m x 24 m along with 5 Nos of VT pumps of 1400 HP
The estimated cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 44649 crore at 2008-09 price level with BC ratio as 186 State Finance Concurrence has already been obtained
Chairman asked why the irrigation cost per hectare is so high The representative from the Govt of Maharashtra replied that the project is basically a lift irrigation scheme As such the irrigation cost per hectare is high
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should be completed by March 2014 and no further timecost overrun would be considered by the Committee
8 Rengali Irrigation Sub-project LBC-II (Revised-Major) Orissa
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Rengali Irrigation Sub-project LBC-II Orissa was earlier considered and accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 65th meeting held on 14696 for Rs 70515 at 1995 price level Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment clearance to this project in July 1997 for providing irrigation to CCA of 93501 ha with 90 intensity of irrigation
The proposal envisages completion of all works of Left Bank Canal from 30 km to 141 km with head discharge of 13222 cumec to irrigate the CCA of 93501 ha
()
The present proposal is a revised cost estimate and there is no change in the scope of the project The revised cost has been finalized in CWC for Rs 195834 crore at 2009-10 price level with BC ratio as 1986 State Finance concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-V)
Secretary (WR) obseNed that work programme is too lengthy As such he desired that the work schedule should be revised in such a way that the project should be completed by March 2015 It was also decided that no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject to the aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
9 Kachnoda Dam project (Revised-Major) Uttar Pradesh
CE (PLlO) cwe briefly introduced the project proposal Kachnoda dam project was considered and accepted in the 87th TAC meeting held on 17112006 Planning Commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal in Jan 2007 for Rs 8867 crore at 2004 price level for providing irrigation to 11 699 ha of CCA and annual irrigation to the tune of 10850 ha
The project envisages construction of following main components
a) 41 km long and 16 m high earthen dam with a live storage of 5464 Million Cubic Metre
b) An ogee shaped masonry spillway of 127 m length with 9 nos vertical gates of size 12 x 71 m each to pass maximum flood discharge of 6038 cumec
c) Left main canal of length 154 km with head discharge of 3 cumec and Right main canal of length 84 km with head discharge of 275 cumec with their distribution systems to provide irrigation to an area of 5173 ha of CCA
d) Apart from above irrigation facilities to 6096 ha under existing Lalitpur canal system and 430 ha under existing Dilwara distributory of Jamni canal are also proposed to be brought under command of Kachnoda dam project
The present revised cost estimate is without change in scope and the revised cost has been finalized for Rs 42345 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 109 State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-VI) Chairman observed that BC ratio of the project proposal is very marginal but keeping the chronic drought prone area of command the proposal may be accepted subject to the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject tothe aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
7
10 Flood protection works to Brahmani-Kelua-Birupa Doab of Brahmani system (Flood Control) Orissa
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood protection to provide protection to 17100 area in Jaipur district of Orissa The proposal
a) Raising and strengthening of existing embankments -8649km
b) Construction of new embankment at - 1583 km
c) Construction of spurs - 24 Nos
d) Renovation of drains - 3750 km
e) Construction of sluices 10 Nos
f) Construction of launching aprons - 2000 m
g) Construction service roads 56 km
The cost of the scheme has been finalized by CWC for Rs 6232 crore at price level with BC ratio as 1 The State Finance Concurrence has
been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VII) On query related to provision of launching aprons it was clarified by Project officials that there would provision of the aprons where are considered essential It was further informed by the project authority that project was formulated on the of model study carried out by 11 Chennai
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should completed by March 2013 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
11 Revised Project Estimate for construction of Right Marginal Bund on river Ganga from Bhogpur to Balawali (Flood Control) Dist Haridwar Uttarakhand
CE (PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 40460 persons and provide protection to 9000 ha land in 10 villages of Uttarakhand from the fury of flood
scheme was originally sanctioned for Rs 11 crore for providing protection along river Ganga in a length of 205 km Due to cost escalation only 105 m of embankment is being constructed by the Gov with 11 crore as earlier approved The scheme is an ongoing under Management Programme MoWR The Empowered Committee in July 2009 decided that the cost of the scheme may allowed to revise the price level of March 2008
The present proposal envisages Construction of embankment of remaining 10 km length in a stretch of the river from 105 km 205
8
The present revised estimate of flood control scheme has been examined in GFCC and finalized for Rs 2069 crore with BC ratio as 509 The State Finance Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VIII) Commissioner (Ganga) advised the Govt of Uttarakhand to send scheme-wise budget allocation for project in question
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
12 Scheme for Desilting of river Ichamati along the common Border portion for better drainage and flood management (Flood Control) West Bengal
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 984 lakhs and to provide protection of 225 sq km area The proposal envisages
a) Desilting of river Ichamati by means of suitable floating type excavator mounted on pontoon (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 15 28000 cum)
b) Desilting of river Ichamati by manual labour within clmr land and depositing the excavated earth at suitable distance (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 139000 cum)
c) Total length of excavationdesilting is 20415 km
GFCC has finalized the cost of the project for Rs 3823 crore with BC ratio as 637 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IX)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with Vote of thanks to the Chair
9
Annexure-l 10sth Meeting of Advisory Committee
bull LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
fVembers of the Committee
SI ShriMrs 1 UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair 2 Allanya Ray Financial Advisor Ministry of Water Resources Member 3 Avinash Misbra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Planning Member
Commission) 4 Saidul Haq Hydrologist ( Representing Chairh1an CGWB) Member 5 JSBawa Director (HPampI) CEA (Representing Centra Electricity Member
Authority) () S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO cwe New D~lhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees a Ministry of water Resources
7 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MoWR b) Central vVater Commission
~ R C lha Member (RM) CWC New Delhi lty Jndra Raj Member (WPampP) 10 ~ K lYOlhi Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi II S K Chaudhary Chief Engineer (FM) ewc New Delhi 12 T S Patil Chid Engineer (MCO) CWC Nagpur
deg1 3 M K Sinha Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New Delhi 14 BG Kaushik Chief Engineer (PPO) CWC New Delhi 15 V K Chawla Chief Engineer (lMO) CWC New Delhi 10 Y K Sharma Chief Engineer (IBO) cwe Chandigarh 17 KN Keslui Chief Engineer (LGBO) CWC Patna 1~ G S Tyagi Director UTampSS CWC New Delhi 19 Gorakh Thakur Director CA-l CWC New Delhi 20 Ajay KumarDirector PA (N) cwe New Delhi 2L D M Raipure Dixector Appraisal CWC Nagpur -
22 P C ]ha Director PA-C CWC New Delhi middot -lt
4-middotM middot ~ 23 R K Kanodia Director PA-S CWC New Delhi
24 M W Paunikar DD PA-N CWC New Delhi 25 B Rai DD PA-C CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC 26 AK GanjuChairman GFCC Patna 27 S Masood Husain Member (Planning) GFCC Patna
d) State Governmenofficers Bihar
28 Ajay Nayak PriRcipal Secretary WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 29 SiJsil Kumar Singh SE WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 30 P K lha Resident Engineer Govt of Bihar
Chattisgarh 31 B K Rai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur 32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
middot33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur 34 BK Pndey AE Bilaspur
Chattisgarh
3~~~ BKRai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur
32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur
34 B K Pndey A E Bilaspur
Madhya Pradesh F
35 KN Agarwal Member Engineering NVDA Bhopal ~ KC Chauhan Chief Engineer Lower Narmada Projects Indore 37 OPJadhau Chief Engineer Rani Awauli Baisugar Project Bayi Hills
Jabalpur 38 PN Sharma Executive Engineer Man Project Division
Maharashtra
39 HK Tonpe Chief Engineer Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 40 VR Bhure SE Jalgaon Irrigation Project Jalgaon 41 CS Modak ED Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 42 SN Patil Executive Engineer Jalgaon
Orissa
43 DK Das Additional Secretary WRD Govt of Orissa Bhubaneswar
M Harish ChBehera Engineer-in-Chief Water Resources Bhubaneswar
45 Chakradhar Mohnta CEampBM Brahmani Lfet Basin Angul
~ Basudev Mohapatra SE Eastern Circle Cuttak
47 Gopal Krishna Behera EE OECF Divn VIBhuban
~ Subrat Das EE Jaraka Irrigation Divn Jaraka
Uttar Pradesh
49 S Ahmad Engineer-in- Chief Irrigation Deptt
50 SP Singh SE Irrigation Deptt
51 Avinash Misra AE ICD-ILalipur
52 AKNiranjan AE ICD-IIILalipur
Uattarkhand
53 Rajeev Gupta Principal Secretary Govt of Uttarakhand Dehradun
~ AK Dinker SE Irrigation Works Circle Dehradun
55 DD Dalal EE Dehradun
West Bengal
~ TK Ghosh Chief Engineer IampW Deptt Kolkata West Bengal
57 S Konar Se Greater Kolkata Drainage Circle West Bengal
~ltcl (bullbull M2~Vlimikillgal~(hi~middot7 20 j 0shy
G~t cf CihOl WjlCr tsrmiddottlrCcs j)cplitmellt
Fron Fr Aji~ i(UlH-l Sarnjya
~---
loinl S-rtlilf (ngiwcril)~)
ro Sri 0 Thkw [iii ~Itp A-~1
Centrill ~atcr ( onunissm W7 (~-rl )tli BhltlwaJl l~ K -la1f1 New D~thi
lt ~r
Prtn1 diil0d r 6 q20 10
S~Lgt S~te f jlli[tCf CQnCUlTc je for rc3lotat ion work (If Elll (t~rn G)JldHJlaquo_~ltid Systcm (MltiurKRcvi~-d) fsihar
1 Ref- Yo~~r leu no n p2TOI )middotPA(lli 14~lti) dilW tj-(c2(JO
~
Dcnr Sir I ino (11 uin(te~l (I) coves tL tiliwial CIiC1rCnc~ r~ ll 1stumt1olt ()r
q)rk of Ea5lcr~Gmi~ Caxal S)MI~nt Cv1~iol l(evis~d) Dihur coHting H3 6)4 n (W(~
~Hx Hundr()(J Eil~htyF(hl Omiddotm amp Se~mly J~i~~illakh) under rUJ Il1tkr CClltrall)~Ji
~dlHn~ ( 00 Cclrl~ A ~~str~
Co)Pf )f prxc~(~3 Jf FlHpoc~rd Ccrlfllj~e (iS1 Srbcme) OOVrtlJI1(J)( or 13 Uli1 i~ Cl1(ued for rjity rcI~ltlle $
Th~a ~ [0] )0) ~ llG ironnniol1 ar l nm ~~fll ~ctir)1
En()IIr A alxmiddotyc
i
~ rr
j L0-shy
XOW3 failltfui ly te~ ~~~ --P A---i-~r- --( shyV V ~ ~TI ~
(Ajit Kur1gtr Silhniyar) I
Joilt Se(fct~i nlbii-~e(e)
I
J i ~ middot kl If middot shy~ ~ I
( ~ 4- bull bull
~
~ ~ ( J
~~ 1 1
I
middotr ti bull~ 0 middot [
~~~~~
~ ~ tmiddot
amp
) t i
rI
i k ~~ ~
r ~_ r~ It- ~ -r ~ --~oolt_ _ bull _ ll 1 -- ~ ~- a U -nT
n)~~ ~ ~ lmiddot bull ( I 1 it toO l i 1
I bullbullbullfy ( -1 ~- A1J ~ 1 ) ~ ~~ If ~ A I J ~
~ ~~ i j ~ t ] ~ t -+J
Jro)lllt ti tTl bull - 4 li 1 ~ J
lICT cf~InN l1nlf1r ~imp~
~Jl ir)~llr ft1P_~ T~r~
ifgtLJi ltP If 3) V Tr-(J_I) 1 ~1--21 oon ~rt1~~rr11rltLI 00 2010 )In
~Q ~f1lQm
r14l middot~I ~rz MI ~mu~~ lnf[lf middot)~Q~IttJ~ (poundPc)
[q7~- t~QTm11 Itl~ f ftllmr~r~I~(i3q)cr~qt tPl tlt~~r i6fnIlT I$~~i lrmfl ~ Rlf~lr ~ji~ill~~II (iIll q~l ~l~~m u~IW61~ ~4li~hJ I
~~t- ~~ ~r~r qjq~ w~5li 1 ~t-O21J0(l ~cI~[lF $liqj 1fUl02010 --0(J--gt bull
~Vlaquo mmf 1~~r31Jgt f~) til 1~irHlU~ ~il~rltillli~~fr qiT lifiiTJ J1lt1~ ltt tV3( W1rltlr W RfF~~fT ti iffit~r Qi11l ~ ~ 1fJ1 V (fj~)~ (i 1ifl ~ ~~ r
~l 71Rt T1T~) tt WTWj(f) $1 ~~ltr~tITtra J~II~(l ~netT ftT ~r H wrr ~m f1 fir ~16-rr r ~ -rRfgt -i~it r~ ~1 Ii1~jii 11 middotR1~rtr mn Glom ltmr~1 lt~ T~rl ~~ -xi) 2252
iil~ r~ -ltltir-- qrlt em i11tft1 qtllr 3Ii I1~r -iI middot~tmx 1tVn tj~r AlfJP l~ 3i~h1 r
~~ r-~ KI ~rFl qA ~lImiddoti-eltl r~1 in0- iv~ III i gt
t~
2 1iWf-n ~t 0300 (~h$rlt Ulfit1 ~q 7500 ~IH1r T~l i~il 15eOJ t-qtm ~rl 14 ~nf1Hltm ftjqr~ ~HlTfltlTI t I ~ middotf
ltflit tmlrT f~llllqQ j1 m~~l ~~ODI) 10 ~~ ~i P)~ ojlt ~(li) ~ 3(~) tfJ
Jfjlaquor tllWiI ltP) n~~~T tlIltpfn ~ WIf ~q ~irif ~r-~~(~ J~~IO~Qjil1011 ifil ~l ~1 tll) q(rn flTljlif ilipf ~rr~lT filj([ 3Jri IfltH mr4 lfll~ middotltlVImiddot l rt1j~1 TllJfll u)jlJOrm WfTUf-tl-f ~nt1q q~ ftrrr ~Jll~1 I - ~~i~
It ~rJnun- rlgt~ll IIE-IT Illllr - - (~ Ff - lorTI r 1lll-r lIT lt1-tT l IIIt)f II ~il~ IQC1(middot tli iYJ ctmiddot 11~ -- OJ J ~~~ middot~ I1 r )i
4Tfucq -t r~ trqri ~H ~~(i~lr xd (ll r 7iicjllf(oJl cltH 3rtii~ ~mur ri ~~ frml-r 111ci~1IRtji ~iTn ~UTfj~~~~ flq~i lUr 1IM-T6 I rr
u rhmiddot~rirr qj[ r-lt~iyenil~ 11( 1 -Wu-v ~~~1Jtmiddot~OO lr(~ Qf~~F~rll (Gn~IJFH) cii bullbulltI bull
bull rt- f1 n-~ ~ I i n -]
G f4-m fltMFT um ~lil lt~r if~U41 1~J-- i4~))if i-~ flfW-lIO ftjrltfgt 24GfliJ 0 IrJ ~~ ~~f( l1GI1 ltJi tnl ~ I
7 ~IfT ltliT fniJittTIU -(Hi if r11U 61 lLlJ f)nH ii1~1J JI~~rn -~~j~ I -g1 ltojflF[ ur -Jh 1 1it ~ h I ~
ol-t fl( q Ir ~ middot 0 ~
J~)() tmfuPTI ~ IlJ1Ill1U 6- ll middot(l
~ll ~t~IrIffi~~---- -gt --0 ~ ~~ - ~- ~~~-lt-~ -~ ~
n middot -r-~- i--
- ~ (-ill~ 1~~r gt-) (~ ~ ~
middotlfli~ iI~
fd mfllHmiddotlipli11 ~ n~ 1S1ml ~Gl1Jmiddot 4
l-fImiddottvHrd L ) t ~ gt11 I ~I ~i ~~ltirfl 1iOf-~ ampwr -~I I ~ ~ lo-~ r yC- ~
1( ~ ~ ~
~~ a~ r
bull ~
I tJltt-J Iic ~ l~~J 12L13 12 ~Lk Lmiddot I+i Iii 6 ~bt( ~LI
lt ~~h 1middot~middot_b~ - y~
~
I lJ~lt IncPJtl ltJ~ ill ~(~~) R-c2f-rJVr I ~1~1J~ ~Ih l-lLI1hll middotb~)llJC~1pound2 cl~~~ CD ~middotlgtJl) ~till (pound)
I ~~-ltd~~JLllLUC ~tt~poundQ(tl8bullil)JJl1-l812 tamplt (Z) 1~middotJJLlJthJ~~tmiddotJtllt~~~f-I=CII~ lJ~JitBh~ (~)
- ~t(JI(jK
JLlttlD ~ll~I~~1 ~~ln i2~u
middotL~~llci middot J~(JiILlt
~1~Hc ll0
(12 ~~Lt lSb ~I)_ middot 1
I (
I ~ h)Jdl~ JlllIg Ilyen~~t lj ~ Jc~19-h ~ ltlpll~ ~
tlJJ~ltQ ~~J ~~ ~S pound6S89 tD~f2 ~Q-tilliP~l5-JJ) ~cQ JJJf-iJll ~Li llii2
I ~0~l~tillt ~-hl kPJL lltJli)Jll~ ~ ~ 7-l1 l-~
Hg~ Qhlh
RJ~t1t ~jJJlil ~l0
C~U~~~) ~~~ LJ K ~
toozm J-wJvt1-~hlt~ii~-middotihb)ik~
LtlJt~t HJ~ lJ-lh l2t-th 1~JjlrTl~li mh
-----_- q -=- bull-~- -
-)l~i ~~ middotf bull bull bull ~ J ~_ _ _ __ bull bull
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
save seepage water and thus to provide irrigation for additional 11000 ha in 32 villages without affecting any parameter of the reservoir
The cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 15995 crore at 2008-09 price level with BC ratio as 181
The Chairman enquired that while computing BC ratio of the project why the old project cost has not been taken into consideration The Project Authorities replied that being an old project the depreciation of the project is too high to consider As a result the impact on BC ratio would be negligible The Chairman suggested for conjunctive utilization of suriace and ground water in the command area so as to reduce the impact of water logging
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that the project may be deferred for reconsideration in the next meeting
4 Halon Irrigation Project (New Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC gave a brief account of the project proposal The Halon Irrigation Project envisages construction of a composite dam near village Karanjiya in the district of Mandia of Madhya Pradesh across river Halon a tributary of river Burne in Narmada basin The Halon Irrigation Project contemplates to provide annual irrigation facilities to an area of 16782 ha (CCA - 13040 ha) in Mandla district a tribal district of Madhya Pradesh The project will irrigate land on the left bank through gravity flow canal
84thThe project was earlier considered in the meeting of Advisory Committee held on 12052005 and was deferred for want of final environmental clearance clearance of RampR plan clearance from CGWB and in the absence of site specific discharge data to review the yield
The Chairman enquired about the status of statutory clearances of the project The Project Authorities replied that all the requisite statutory clearances from Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) Ministry of Environment amp Forest (MoEF) and clearance from CGWB have now been obtained As regards forest clearance it was informed by the Project officials that stage-1 clearance has been obtained and the work will be started after stage-2 clearance
The representative from CEA enquired regarding the provision of Hydroshypower generation in the project The Project Authorities mentioned that provision of Hydro-power generation was not found viable as per the site conditions The Chairman enquired about why the BC ratio of the project is very marginal ie 155 The Project Authorities replied that the command area of the project falls in Mandla district a tribal area in Madhya Pradesh As such the BC ratio is well within the permissible limits The State Finance Concurrence has been received
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
4
5 Man Irrigation Project (Revised Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The original proposal was approved by the Planning Commission in June 1992 for Rs 44 10 cr at 1983 price level The present proposal is a revised cost estimate without any change in its scope and the cost has been finalized for Rs 24603 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 179 The expenditure incurred till March 2010 is 196 crore The State Finance Concurrence has already been received
Chairman enquired about the construction status of the project The Project Authorities replied that the dam and head works of the project had already been completed in 2006 and the canal system is already in operation since the last two years Only some residual works are to be completed by March 2012
Chairman suggested for conjunctive utilization of surface and ground water in the command area to reduce the impact of water logging in consultation with CGWB
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further cost time revision will be considered by the Committee
6 Upper Narmada Irrigation Project (New Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Upper Narmada Irrigation Project envisages construction of a composite dam of maximum height of 3380 m and total length of 212 km near village Shobhapur (Rinatola) of Dindori district of Madhya Pradesh The project contemplates to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 26622 ha annually in Annupur and Dindori districts of Madhya Pradesh Most of the beneficiaries from the project belong to Schedule Caste (SC) and Schedule Tribe (ST) categories
The project was considered in the 84 th meeting of Advisory Committee held on 1205 2005 and was deferred for want of environmental clearance and RampR clearance
The cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 68393 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 157 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IV)
Chairman enquired about the status of statutory clearances of the project The Project Authorities replied that all the requisite statutory clearances from Ministry of Tribal Affairs (lVIoTA) and Ministry of Environment amp Forest (MoEF) have now been obtained On query regarding the physical programme of the project the Project Authorities replied that the project works would be awarded on turn-key basis and would be completed by March 2015 The Chairman asked why the BC ratio of the project is marginal (153)
5
f The Project Authorities replied that the command area of the project falls
in Annupur amp Dindori districts a tribal area in Madhya Pradesh As such the BC ratio is well with in the permissible limits (1)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
7 Shelgaon Barrage Project (New-Medium) Maharashtra
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Shelgaon Barrage a medium irrigation project envisages construction of 41965 m long barrage across river Tapi in Tapi basin The project is located near village Shelgaon in the Jalgaon district of Maharashtra The project is planned to irrigate annually an area of 11318 ha (CCA-9589 ha) benefiting 19 villages of Jalgaon district
The project envisages construction of the following main components
i) A 419 65 m long barrage with 18 Nos of radial gates of size 1830 m x 1676m
ii) A 465 m long left side earthen embankment and 165 m long saddle earthen embankment with a top width of 75 m
iii) An intake well of size 3 m x 11 m and jack well of size 9 m x 24 m along with 5 Nos of VT pumps of 1400 HP
The estimated cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 44649 crore at 2008-09 price level with BC ratio as 186 State Finance Concurrence has already been obtained
Chairman asked why the irrigation cost per hectare is so high The representative from the Govt of Maharashtra replied that the project is basically a lift irrigation scheme As such the irrigation cost per hectare is high
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should be completed by March 2014 and no further timecost overrun would be considered by the Committee
8 Rengali Irrigation Sub-project LBC-II (Revised-Major) Orissa
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Rengali Irrigation Sub-project LBC-II Orissa was earlier considered and accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 65th meeting held on 14696 for Rs 70515 at 1995 price level Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment clearance to this project in July 1997 for providing irrigation to CCA of 93501 ha with 90 intensity of irrigation
The proposal envisages completion of all works of Left Bank Canal from 30 km to 141 km with head discharge of 13222 cumec to irrigate the CCA of 93501 ha
()
The present proposal is a revised cost estimate and there is no change in the scope of the project The revised cost has been finalized in CWC for Rs 195834 crore at 2009-10 price level with BC ratio as 1986 State Finance concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-V)
Secretary (WR) obseNed that work programme is too lengthy As such he desired that the work schedule should be revised in such a way that the project should be completed by March 2015 It was also decided that no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject to the aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
9 Kachnoda Dam project (Revised-Major) Uttar Pradesh
CE (PLlO) cwe briefly introduced the project proposal Kachnoda dam project was considered and accepted in the 87th TAC meeting held on 17112006 Planning Commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal in Jan 2007 for Rs 8867 crore at 2004 price level for providing irrigation to 11 699 ha of CCA and annual irrigation to the tune of 10850 ha
The project envisages construction of following main components
a) 41 km long and 16 m high earthen dam with a live storage of 5464 Million Cubic Metre
b) An ogee shaped masonry spillway of 127 m length with 9 nos vertical gates of size 12 x 71 m each to pass maximum flood discharge of 6038 cumec
c) Left main canal of length 154 km with head discharge of 3 cumec and Right main canal of length 84 km with head discharge of 275 cumec with their distribution systems to provide irrigation to an area of 5173 ha of CCA
d) Apart from above irrigation facilities to 6096 ha under existing Lalitpur canal system and 430 ha under existing Dilwara distributory of Jamni canal are also proposed to be brought under command of Kachnoda dam project
The present revised cost estimate is without change in scope and the revised cost has been finalized for Rs 42345 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 109 State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-VI) Chairman observed that BC ratio of the project proposal is very marginal but keeping the chronic drought prone area of command the proposal may be accepted subject to the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject tothe aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
7
10 Flood protection works to Brahmani-Kelua-Birupa Doab of Brahmani system (Flood Control) Orissa
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood protection to provide protection to 17100 area in Jaipur district of Orissa The proposal
a) Raising and strengthening of existing embankments -8649km
b) Construction of new embankment at - 1583 km
c) Construction of spurs - 24 Nos
d) Renovation of drains - 3750 km
e) Construction of sluices 10 Nos
f) Construction of launching aprons - 2000 m
g) Construction service roads 56 km
The cost of the scheme has been finalized by CWC for Rs 6232 crore at price level with BC ratio as 1 The State Finance Concurrence has
been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VII) On query related to provision of launching aprons it was clarified by Project officials that there would provision of the aprons where are considered essential It was further informed by the project authority that project was formulated on the of model study carried out by 11 Chennai
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should completed by March 2013 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
11 Revised Project Estimate for construction of Right Marginal Bund on river Ganga from Bhogpur to Balawali (Flood Control) Dist Haridwar Uttarakhand
CE (PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 40460 persons and provide protection to 9000 ha land in 10 villages of Uttarakhand from the fury of flood
scheme was originally sanctioned for Rs 11 crore for providing protection along river Ganga in a length of 205 km Due to cost escalation only 105 m of embankment is being constructed by the Gov with 11 crore as earlier approved The scheme is an ongoing under Management Programme MoWR The Empowered Committee in July 2009 decided that the cost of the scheme may allowed to revise the price level of March 2008
The present proposal envisages Construction of embankment of remaining 10 km length in a stretch of the river from 105 km 205
8
The present revised estimate of flood control scheme has been examined in GFCC and finalized for Rs 2069 crore with BC ratio as 509 The State Finance Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VIII) Commissioner (Ganga) advised the Govt of Uttarakhand to send scheme-wise budget allocation for project in question
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
12 Scheme for Desilting of river Ichamati along the common Border portion for better drainage and flood management (Flood Control) West Bengal
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 984 lakhs and to provide protection of 225 sq km area The proposal envisages
a) Desilting of river Ichamati by means of suitable floating type excavator mounted on pontoon (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 15 28000 cum)
b) Desilting of river Ichamati by manual labour within clmr land and depositing the excavated earth at suitable distance (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 139000 cum)
c) Total length of excavationdesilting is 20415 km
GFCC has finalized the cost of the project for Rs 3823 crore with BC ratio as 637 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IX)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with Vote of thanks to the Chair
9
Annexure-l 10sth Meeting of Advisory Committee
bull LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
fVembers of the Committee
SI ShriMrs 1 UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair 2 Allanya Ray Financial Advisor Ministry of Water Resources Member 3 Avinash Misbra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Planning Member
Commission) 4 Saidul Haq Hydrologist ( Representing Chairh1an CGWB) Member 5 JSBawa Director (HPampI) CEA (Representing Centra Electricity Member
Authority) () S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO cwe New D~lhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees a Ministry of water Resources
7 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MoWR b) Central vVater Commission
~ R C lha Member (RM) CWC New Delhi lty Jndra Raj Member (WPampP) 10 ~ K lYOlhi Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi II S K Chaudhary Chief Engineer (FM) ewc New Delhi 12 T S Patil Chid Engineer (MCO) CWC Nagpur
deg1 3 M K Sinha Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New Delhi 14 BG Kaushik Chief Engineer (PPO) CWC New Delhi 15 V K Chawla Chief Engineer (lMO) CWC New Delhi 10 Y K Sharma Chief Engineer (IBO) cwe Chandigarh 17 KN Keslui Chief Engineer (LGBO) CWC Patna 1~ G S Tyagi Director UTampSS CWC New Delhi 19 Gorakh Thakur Director CA-l CWC New Delhi 20 Ajay KumarDirector PA (N) cwe New Delhi 2L D M Raipure Dixector Appraisal CWC Nagpur -
22 P C ]ha Director PA-C CWC New Delhi middot -lt
4-middotM middot ~ 23 R K Kanodia Director PA-S CWC New Delhi
24 M W Paunikar DD PA-N CWC New Delhi 25 B Rai DD PA-C CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC 26 AK GanjuChairman GFCC Patna 27 S Masood Husain Member (Planning) GFCC Patna
d) State Governmenofficers Bihar
28 Ajay Nayak PriRcipal Secretary WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 29 SiJsil Kumar Singh SE WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 30 P K lha Resident Engineer Govt of Bihar
Chattisgarh 31 B K Rai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur 32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
middot33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur 34 BK Pndey AE Bilaspur
Chattisgarh
3~~~ BKRai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur
32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur
34 B K Pndey A E Bilaspur
Madhya Pradesh F
35 KN Agarwal Member Engineering NVDA Bhopal ~ KC Chauhan Chief Engineer Lower Narmada Projects Indore 37 OPJadhau Chief Engineer Rani Awauli Baisugar Project Bayi Hills
Jabalpur 38 PN Sharma Executive Engineer Man Project Division
Maharashtra
39 HK Tonpe Chief Engineer Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 40 VR Bhure SE Jalgaon Irrigation Project Jalgaon 41 CS Modak ED Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 42 SN Patil Executive Engineer Jalgaon
Orissa
43 DK Das Additional Secretary WRD Govt of Orissa Bhubaneswar
M Harish ChBehera Engineer-in-Chief Water Resources Bhubaneswar
45 Chakradhar Mohnta CEampBM Brahmani Lfet Basin Angul
~ Basudev Mohapatra SE Eastern Circle Cuttak
47 Gopal Krishna Behera EE OECF Divn VIBhuban
~ Subrat Das EE Jaraka Irrigation Divn Jaraka
Uttar Pradesh
49 S Ahmad Engineer-in- Chief Irrigation Deptt
50 SP Singh SE Irrigation Deptt
51 Avinash Misra AE ICD-ILalipur
52 AKNiranjan AE ICD-IIILalipur
Uattarkhand
53 Rajeev Gupta Principal Secretary Govt of Uttarakhand Dehradun
~ AK Dinker SE Irrigation Works Circle Dehradun
55 DD Dalal EE Dehradun
West Bengal
~ TK Ghosh Chief Engineer IampW Deptt Kolkata West Bengal
57 S Konar Se Greater Kolkata Drainage Circle West Bengal
~ltcl (bullbull M2~Vlimikillgal~(hi~middot7 20 j 0shy
G~t cf CihOl WjlCr tsrmiddottlrCcs j)cplitmellt
Fron Fr Aji~ i(UlH-l Sarnjya
~---
loinl S-rtlilf (ngiwcril)~)
ro Sri 0 Thkw [iii ~Itp A-~1
Centrill ~atcr ( onunissm W7 (~-rl )tli BhltlwaJl l~ K -la1f1 New D~thi
lt ~r
Prtn1 diil0d r 6 q20 10
S~Lgt S~te f jlli[tCf CQnCUlTc je for rc3lotat ion work (If Elll (t~rn G)JldHJlaquo_~ltid Systcm (MltiurKRcvi~-d) fsihar
1 Ref- Yo~~r leu no n p2TOI )middotPA(lli 14~lti) dilW tj-(c2(JO
~
Dcnr Sir I ino (11 uin(te~l (I) coves tL tiliwial CIiC1rCnc~ r~ ll 1stumt1olt ()r
q)rk of Ea5lcr~Gmi~ Caxal S)MI~nt Cv1~iol l(evis~d) Dihur coHting H3 6)4 n (W(~
~Hx Hundr()(J Eil~htyF(hl Omiddotm amp Se~mly J~i~~illakh) under rUJ Il1tkr CClltrall)~Ji
~dlHn~ ( 00 Cclrl~ A ~~str~
Co)Pf )f prxc~(~3 Jf FlHpoc~rd Ccrlfllj~e (iS1 Srbcme) OOVrtlJI1(J)( or 13 Uli1 i~ Cl1(ued for rjity rcI~ltlle $
Th~a ~ [0] )0) ~ llG ironnniol1 ar l nm ~~fll ~ctir)1
En()IIr A alxmiddotyc
i
~ rr
j L0-shy
XOW3 failltfui ly te~ ~~~ --P A---i-~r- --( shyV V ~ ~TI ~
(Ajit Kur1gtr Silhniyar) I
Joilt Se(fct~i nlbii-~e(e)
I
J i ~ middot kl If middot shy~ ~ I
( ~ 4- bull bull
~
~ ~ ( J
~~ 1 1
I
middotr ti bull~ 0 middot [
~~~~~
~ ~ tmiddot
amp
) t i
rI
i k ~~ ~
r ~_ r~ It- ~ -r ~ --~oolt_ _ bull _ ll 1 -- ~ ~- a U -nT
n)~~ ~ ~ lmiddot bull ( I 1 it toO l i 1
I bullbullbullfy ( -1 ~- A1J ~ 1 ) ~ ~~ If ~ A I J ~
~ ~~ i j ~ t ] ~ t -+J
Jro)lllt ti tTl bull - 4 li 1 ~ J
lICT cf~InN l1nlf1r ~imp~
~Jl ir)~llr ft1P_~ T~r~
ifgtLJi ltP If 3) V Tr-(J_I) 1 ~1--21 oon ~rt1~~rr11rltLI 00 2010 )In
~Q ~f1lQm
r14l middot~I ~rz MI ~mu~~ lnf[lf middot)~Q~IttJ~ (poundPc)
[q7~- t~QTm11 Itl~ f ftllmr~r~I~(i3q)cr~qt tPl tlt~~r i6fnIlT I$~~i lrmfl ~ Rlf~lr ~ji~ill~~II (iIll q~l ~l~~m u~IW61~ ~4li~hJ I
~~t- ~~ ~r~r qjq~ w~5li 1 ~t-O21J0(l ~cI~[lF $liqj 1fUl02010 --0(J--gt bull
~Vlaquo mmf 1~~r31Jgt f~) til 1~irHlU~ ~il~rltillli~~fr qiT lifiiTJ J1lt1~ ltt tV3( W1rltlr W RfF~~fT ti iffit~r Qi11l ~ ~ 1fJ1 V (fj~)~ (i 1ifl ~ ~~ r
~l 71Rt T1T~) tt WTWj(f) $1 ~~ltr~tITtra J~II~(l ~netT ftT ~r H wrr ~m f1 fir ~16-rr r ~ -rRfgt -i~it r~ ~1 Ii1~jii 11 middotR1~rtr mn Glom ltmr~1 lt~ T~rl ~~ -xi) 2252
iil~ r~ -ltltir-- qrlt em i11tft1 qtllr 3Ii I1~r -iI middot~tmx 1tVn tj~r AlfJP l~ 3i~h1 r
~~ r-~ KI ~rFl qA ~lImiddoti-eltl r~1 in0- iv~ III i gt
t~
2 1iWf-n ~t 0300 (~h$rlt Ulfit1 ~q 7500 ~IH1r T~l i~il 15eOJ t-qtm ~rl 14 ~nf1Hltm ftjqr~ ~HlTfltlTI t I ~ middotf
ltflit tmlrT f~llllqQ j1 m~~l ~~ODI) 10 ~~ ~i P)~ ojlt ~(li) ~ 3(~) tfJ
Jfjlaquor tllWiI ltP) n~~~T tlIltpfn ~ WIf ~q ~irif ~r-~~(~ J~~IO~Qjil1011 ifil ~l ~1 tll) q(rn flTljlif ilipf ~rr~lT filj([ 3Jri IfltH mr4 lfll~ middotltlVImiddot l rt1j~1 TllJfll u)jlJOrm WfTUf-tl-f ~nt1q q~ ftrrr ~Jll~1 I - ~~i~
It ~rJnun- rlgt~ll IIE-IT Illllr - - (~ Ff - lorTI r 1lll-r lIT lt1-tT l IIIt)f II ~il~ IQC1(middot tli iYJ ctmiddot 11~ -- OJ J ~~~ middot~ I1 r )i
4Tfucq -t r~ trqri ~H ~~(i~lr xd (ll r 7iicjllf(oJl cltH 3rtii~ ~mur ri ~~ frml-r 111ci~1IRtji ~iTn ~UTfj~~~~ flq~i lUr 1IM-T6 I rr
u rhmiddot~rirr qj[ r-lt~iyenil~ 11( 1 -Wu-v ~~~1Jtmiddot~OO lr(~ Qf~~F~rll (Gn~IJFH) cii bullbulltI bull
bull rt- f1 n-~ ~ I i n -]
G f4-m fltMFT um ~lil lt~r if~U41 1~J-- i4~))if i-~ flfW-lIO ftjrltfgt 24GfliJ 0 IrJ ~~ ~~f( l1GI1 ltJi tnl ~ I
7 ~IfT ltliT fniJittTIU -(Hi if r11U 61 lLlJ f)nH ii1~1J JI~~rn -~~j~ I -g1 ltojflF[ ur -Jh 1 1it ~ h I ~
ol-t fl( q Ir ~ middot 0 ~
J~)() tmfuPTI ~ IlJ1Ill1U 6- ll middot(l
~ll ~t~IrIffi~~---- -gt --0 ~ ~~ - ~- ~~~-lt-~ -~ ~
n middot -r-~- i--
- ~ (-ill~ 1~~r gt-) (~ ~ ~
middotlfli~ iI~
fd mfllHmiddotlipli11 ~ n~ 1S1ml ~Gl1Jmiddot 4
l-fImiddottvHrd L ) t ~ gt11 I ~I ~i ~~ltirfl 1iOf-~ ampwr -~I I ~ ~ lo-~ r yC- ~
1( ~ ~ ~
~~ a~ r
bull ~
I tJltt-J Iic ~ l~~J 12L13 12 ~Lk Lmiddot I+i Iii 6 ~bt( ~LI
lt ~~h 1middot~middot_b~ - y~
~
I lJ~lt IncPJtl ltJ~ ill ~(~~) R-c2f-rJVr I ~1~1J~ ~Ih l-lLI1hll middotb~)llJC~1pound2 cl~~~ CD ~middotlgtJl) ~till (pound)
I ~~-ltd~~JLllLUC ~tt~poundQ(tl8bullil)JJl1-l812 tamplt (Z) 1~middotJJLlJthJ~~tmiddotJtllt~~~f-I=CII~ lJ~JitBh~ (~)
- ~t(JI(jK
JLlttlD ~ll~I~~1 ~~ln i2~u
middotL~~llci middot J~(JiILlt
~1~Hc ll0
(12 ~~Lt lSb ~I)_ middot 1
I (
I ~ h)Jdl~ JlllIg Ilyen~~t lj ~ Jc~19-h ~ ltlpll~ ~
tlJJ~ltQ ~~J ~~ ~S pound6S89 tD~f2 ~Q-tilliP~l5-JJ) ~cQ JJJf-iJll ~Li llii2
I ~0~l~tillt ~-hl kPJL lltJli)Jll~ ~ ~ 7-l1 l-~
Hg~ Qhlh
RJ~t1t ~jJJlil ~l0
C~U~~~) ~~~ LJ K ~
toozm J-wJvt1-~hlt~ii~-middotihb)ik~
LtlJt~t HJ~ lJ-lh l2t-th 1~JjlrTl~li mh
-----_- q -=- bull-~- -
-)l~i ~~ middotf bull bull bull ~ J ~_ _ _ __ bull bull
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
5 Man Irrigation Project (Revised Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The original proposal was approved by the Planning Commission in June 1992 for Rs 44 10 cr at 1983 price level The present proposal is a revised cost estimate without any change in its scope and the cost has been finalized for Rs 24603 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 179 The expenditure incurred till March 2010 is 196 crore The State Finance Concurrence has already been received
Chairman enquired about the construction status of the project The Project Authorities replied that the dam and head works of the project had already been completed in 2006 and the canal system is already in operation since the last two years Only some residual works are to be completed by March 2012
Chairman suggested for conjunctive utilization of surface and ground water in the command area to reduce the impact of water logging in consultation with CGWB
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further cost time revision will be considered by the Committee
6 Upper Narmada Irrigation Project (New Major) Madhya Pradesh
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Upper Narmada Irrigation Project envisages construction of a composite dam of maximum height of 3380 m and total length of 212 km near village Shobhapur (Rinatola) of Dindori district of Madhya Pradesh The project contemplates to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 26622 ha annually in Annupur and Dindori districts of Madhya Pradesh Most of the beneficiaries from the project belong to Schedule Caste (SC) and Schedule Tribe (ST) categories
The project was considered in the 84 th meeting of Advisory Committee held on 1205 2005 and was deferred for want of environmental clearance and RampR clearance
The cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 68393 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 157 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IV)
Chairman enquired about the status of statutory clearances of the project The Project Authorities replied that all the requisite statutory clearances from Ministry of Tribal Affairs (lVIoTA) and Ministry of Environment amp Forest (MoEF) have now been obtained On query regarding the physical programme of the project the Project Authorities replied that the project works would be awarded on turn-key basis and would be completed by March 2015 The Chairman asked why the BC ratio of the project is marginal (153)
5
f The Project Authorities replied that the command area of the project falls
in Annupur amp Dindori districts a tribal area in Madhya Pradesh As such the BC ratio is well with in the permissible limits (1)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
7 Shelgaon Barrage Project (New-Medium) Maharashtra
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Shelgaon Barrage a medium irrigation project envisages construction of 41965 m long barrage across river Tapi in Tapi basin The project is located near village Shelgaon in the Jalgaon district of Maharashtra The project is planned to irrigate annually an area of 11318 ha (CCA-9589 ha) benefiting 19 villages of Jalgaon district
The project envisages construction of the following main components
i) A 419 65 m long barrage with 18 Nos of radial gates of size 1830 m x 1676m
ii) A 465 m long left side earthen embankment and 165 m long saddle earthen embankment with a top width of 75 m
iii) An intake well of size 3 m x 11 m and jack well of size 9 m x 24 m along with 5 Nos of VT pumps of 1400 HP
The estimated cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 44649 crore at 2008-09 price level with BC ratio as 186 State Finance Concurrence has already been obtained
Chairman asked why the irrigation cost per hectare is so high The representative from the Govt of Maharashtra replied that the project is basically a lift irrigation scheme As such the irrigation cost per hectare is high
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should be completed by March 2014 and no further timecost overrun would be considered by the Committee
8 Rengali Irrigation Sub-project LBC-II (Revised-Major) Orissa
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Rengali Irrigation Sub-project LBC-II Orissa was earlier considered and accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 65th meeting held on 14696 for Rs 70515 at 1995 price level Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment clearance to this project in July 1997 for providing irrigation to CCA of 93501 ha with 90 intensity of irrigation
The proposal envisages completion of all works of Left Bank Canal from 30 km to 141 km with head discharge of 13222 cumec to irrigate the CCA of 93501 ha
()
The present proposal is a revised cost estimate and there is no change in the scope of the project The revised cost has been finalized in CWC for Rs 195834 crore at 2009-10 price level with BC ratio as 1986 State Finance concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-V)
Secretary (WR) obseNed that work programme is too lengthy As such he desired that the work schedule should be revised in such a way that the project should be completed by March 2015 It was also decided that no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject to the aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
9 Kachnoda Dam project (Revised-Major) Uttar Pradesh
CE (PLlO) cwe briefly introduced the project proposal Kachnoda dam project was considered and accepted in the 87th TAC meeting held on 17112006 Planning Commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal in Jan 2007 for Rs 8867 crore at 2004 price level for providing irrigation to 11 699 ha of CCA and annual irrigation to the tune of 10850 ha
The project envisages construction of following main components
a) 41 km long and 16 m high earthen dam with a live storage of 5464 Million Cubic Metre
b) An ogee shaped masonry spillway of 127 m length with 9 nos vertical gates of size 12 x 71 m each to pass maximum flood discharge of 6038 cumec
c) Left main canal of length 154 km with head discharge of 3 cumec and Right main canal of length 84 km with head discharge of 275 cumec with their distribution systems to provide irrigation to an area of 5173 ha of CCA
d) Apart from above irrigation facilities to 6096 ha under existing Lalitpur canal system and 430 ha under existing Dilwara distributory of Jamni canal are also proposed to be brought under command of Kachnoda dam project
The present revised cost estimate is without change in scope and the revised cost has been finalized for Rs 42345 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 109 State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-VI) Chairman observed that BC ratio of the project proposal is very marginal but keeping the chronic drought prone area of command the proposal may be accepted subject to the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject tothe aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
7
10 Flood protection works to Brahmani-Kelua-Birupa Doab of Brahmani system (Flood Control) Orissa
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood protection to provide protection to 17100 area in Jaipur district of Orissa The proposal
a) Raising and strengthening of existing embankments -8649km
b) Construction of new embankment at - 1583 km
c) Construction of spurs - 24 Nos
d) Renovation of drains - 3750 km
e) Construction of sluices 10 Nos
f) Construction of launching aprons - 2000 m
g) Construction service roads 56 km
The cost of the scheme has been finalized by CWC for Rs 6232 crore at price level with BC ratio as 1 The State Finance Concurrence has
been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VII) On query related to provision of launching aprons it was clarified by Project officials that there would provision of the aprons where are considered essential It was further informed by the project authority that project was formulated on the of model study carried out by 11 Chennai
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should completed by March 2013 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
11 Revised Project Estimate for construction of Right Marginal Bund on river Ganga from Bhogpur to Balawali (Flood Control) Dist Haridwar Uttarakhand
CE (PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 40460 persons and provide protection to 9000 ha land in 10 villages of Uttarakhand from the fury of flood
scheme was originally sanctioned for Rs 11 crore for providing protection along river Ganga in a length of 205 km Due to cost escalation only 105 m of embankment is being constructed by the Gov with 11 crore as earlier approved The scheme is an ongoing under Management Programme MoWR The Empowered Committee in July 2009 decided that the cost of the scheme may allowed to revise the price level of March 2008
The present proposal envisages Construction of embankment of remaining 10 km length in a stretch of the river from 105 km 205
8
The present revised estimate of flood control scheme has been examined in GFCC and finalized for Rs 2069 crore with BC ratio as 509 The State Finance Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VIII) Commissioner (Ganga) advised the Govt of Uttarakhand to send scheme-wise budget allocation for project in question
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
12 Scheme for Desilting of river Ichamati along the common Border portion for better drainage and flood management (Flood Control) West Bengal
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 984 lakhs and to provide protection of 225 sq km area The proposal envisages
a) Desilting of river Ichamati by means of suitable floating type excavator mounted on pontoon (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 15 28000 cum)
b) Desilting of river Ichamati by manual labour within clmr land and depositing the excavated earth at suitable distance (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 139000 cum)
c) Total length of excavationdesilting is 20415 km
GFCC has finalized the cost of the project for Rs 3823 crore with BC ratio as 637 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IX)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with Vote of thanks to the Chair
9
Annexure-l 10sth Meeting of Advisory Committee
bull LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
fVembers of the Committee
SI ShriMrs 1 UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair 2 Allanya Ray Financial Advisor Ministry of Water Resources Member 3 Avinash Misbra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Planning Member
Commission) 4 Saidul Haq Hydrologist ( Representing Chairh1an CGWB) Member 5 JSBawa Director (HPampI) CEA (Representing Centra Electricity Member
Authority) () S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO cwe New D~lhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees a Ministry of water Resources
7 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MoWR b) Central vVater Commission
~ R C lha Member (RM) CWC New Delhi lty Jndra Raj Member (WPampP) 10 ~ K lYOlhi Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi II S K Chaudhary Chief Engineer (FM) ewc New Delhi 12 T S Patil Chid Engineer (MCO) CWC Nagpur
deg1 3 M K Sinha Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New Delhi 14 BG Kaushik Chief Engineer (PPO) CWC New Delhi 15 V K Chawla Chief Engineer (lMO) CWC New Delhi 10 Y K Sharma Chief Engineer (IBO) cwe Chandigarh 17 KN Keslui Chief Engineer (LGBO) CWC Patna 1~ G S Tyagi Director UTampSS CWC New Delhi 19 Gorakh Thakur Director CA-l CWC New Delhi 20 Ajay KumarDirector PA (N) cwe New Delhi 2L D M Raipure Dixector Appraisal CWC Nagpur -
22 P C ]ha Director PA-C CWC New Delhi middot -lt
4-middotM middot ~ 23 R K Kanodia Director PA-S CWC New Delhi
24 M W Paunikar DD PA-N CWC New Delhi 25 B Rai DD PA-C CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC 26 AK GanjuChairman GFCC Patna 27 S Masood Husain Member (Planning) GFCC Patna
d) State Governmenofficers Bihar
28 Ajay Nayak PriRcipal Secretary WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 29 SiJsil Kumar Singh SE WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 30 P K lha Resident Engineer Govt of Bihar
Chattisgarh 31 B K Rai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur 32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
middot33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur 34 BK Pndey AE Bilaspur
Chattisgarh
3~~~ BKRai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur
32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur
34 B K Pndey A E Bilaspur
Madhya Pradesh F
35 KN Agarwal Member Engineering NVDA Bhopal ~ KC Chauhan Chief Engineer Lower Narmada Projects Indore 37 OPJadhau Chief Engineer Rani Awauli Baisugar Project Bayi Hills
Jabalpur 38 PN Sharma Executive Engineer Man Project Division
Maharashtra
39 HK Tonpe Chief Engineer Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 40 VR Bhure SE Jalgaon Irrigation Project Jalgaon 41 CS Modak ED Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 42 SN Patil Executive Engineer Jalgaon
Orissa
43 DK Das Additional Secretary WRD Govt of Orissa Bhubaneswar
M Harish ChBehera Engineer-in-Chief Water Resources Bhubaneswar
45 Chakradhar Mohnta CEampBM Brahmani Lfet Basin Angul
~ Basudev Mohapatra SE Eastern Circle Cuttak
47 Gopal Krishna Behera EE OECF Divn VIBhuban
~ Subrat Das EE Jaraka Irrigation Divn Jaraka
Uttar Pradesh
49 S Ahmad Engineer-in- Chief Irrigation Deptt
50 SP Singh SE Irrigation Deptt
51 Avinash Misra AE ICD-ILalipur
52 AKNiranjan AE ICD-IIILalipur
Uattarkhand
53 Rajeev Gupta Principal Secretary Govt of Uttarakhand Dehradun
~ AK Dinker SE Irrigation Works Circle Dehradun
55 DD Dalal EE Dehradun
West Bengal
~ TK Ghosh Chief Engineer IampW Deptt Kolkata West Bengal
57 S Konar Se Greater Kolkata Drainage Circle West Bengal
~ltcl (bullbull M2~Vlimikillgal~(hi~middot7 20 j 0shy
G~t cf CihOl WjlCr tsrmiddottlrCcs j)cplitmellt
Fron Fr Aji~ i(UlH-l Sarnjya
~---
loinl S-rtlilf (ngiwcril)~)
ro Sri 0 Thkw [iii ~Itp A-~1
Centrill ~atcr ( onunissm W7 (~-rl )tli BhltlwaJl l~ K -la1f1 New D~thi
lt ~r
Prtn1 diil0d r 6 q20 10
S~Lgt S~te f jlli[tCf CQnCUlTc je for rc3lotat ion work (If Elll (t~rn G)JldHJlaquo_~ltid Systcm (MltiurKRcvi~-d) fsihar
1 Ref- Yo~~r leu no n p2TOI )middotPA(lli 14~lti) dilW tj-(c2(JO
~
Dcnr Sir I ino (11 uin(te~l (I) coves tL tiliwial CIiC1rCnc~ r~ ll 1stumt1olt ()r
q)rk of Ea5lcr~Gmi~ Caxal S)MI~nt Cv1~iol l(evis~d) Dihur coHting H3 6)4 n (W(~
~Hx Hundr()(J Eil~htyF(hl Omiddotm amp Se~mly J~i~~illakh) under rUJ Il1tkr CClltrall)~Ji
~dlHn~ ( 00 Cclrl~ A ~~str~
Co)Pf )f prxc~(~3 Jf FlHpoc~rd Ccrlfllj~e (iS1 Srbcme) OOVrtlJI1(J)( or 13 Uli1 i~ Cl1(ued for rjity rcI~ltlle $
Th~a ~ [0] )0) ~ llG ironnniol1 ar l nm ~~fll ~ctir)1
En()IIr A alxmiddotyc
i
~ rr
j L0-shy
XOW3 failltfui ly te~ ~~~ --P A---i-~r- --( shyV V ~ ~TI ~
(Ajit Kur1gtr Silhniyar) I
Joilt Se(fct~i nlbii-~e(e)
I
J i ~ middot kl If middot shy~ ~ I
( ~ 4- bull bull
~
~ ~ ( J
~~ 1 1
I
middotr ti bull~ 0 middot [
~~~~~
~ ~ tmiddot
amp
) t i
rI
i k ~~ ~
r ~_ r~ It- ~ -r ~ --~oolt_ _ bull _ ll 1 -- ~ ~- a U -nT
n)~~ ~ ~ lmiddot bull ( I 1 it toO l i 1
I bullbullbullfy ( -1 ~- A1J ~ 1 ) ~ ~~ If ~ A I J ~
~ ~~ i j ~ t ] ~ t -+J
Jro)lllt ti tTl bull - 4 li 1 ~ J
lICT cf~InN l1nlf1r ~imp~
~Jl ir)~llr ft1P_~ T~r~
ifgtLJi ltP If 3) V Tr-(J_I) 1 ~1--21 oon ~rt1~~rr11rltLI 00 2010 )In
~Q ~f1lQm
r14l middot~I ~rz MI ~mu~~ lnf[lf middot)~Q~IttJ~ (poundPc)
[q7~- t~QTm11 Itl~ f ftllmr~r~I~(i3q)cr~qt tPl tlt~~r i6fnIlT I$~~i lrmfl ~ Rlf~lr ~ji~ill~~II (iIll q~l ~l~~m u~IW61~ ~4li~hJ I
~~t- ~~ ~r~r qjq~ w~5li 1 ~t-O21J0(l ~cI~[lF $liqj 1fUl02010 --0(J--gt bull
~Vlaquo mmf 1~~r31Jgt f~) til 1~irHlU~ ~il~rltillli~~fr qiT lifiiTJ J1lt1~ ltt tV3( W1rltlr W RfF~~fT ti iffit~r Qi11l ~ ~ 1fJ1 V (fj~)~ (i 1ifl ~ ~~ r
~l 71Rt T1T~) tt WTWj(f) $1 ~~ltr~tITtra J~II~(l ~netT ftT ~r H wrr ~m f1 fir ~16-rr r ~ -rRfgt -i~it r~ ~1 Ii1~jii 11 middotR1~rtr mn Glom ltmr~1 lt~ T~rl ~~ -xi) 2252
iil~ r~ -ltltir-- qrlt em i11tft1 qtllr 3Ii I1~r -iI middot~tmx 1tVn tj~r AlfJP l~ 3i~h1 r
~~ r-~ KI ~rFl qA ~lImiddoti-eltl r~1 in0- iv~ III i gt
t~
2 1iWf-n ~t 0300 (~h$rlt Ulfit1 ~q 7500 ~IH1r T~l i~il 15eOJ t-qtm ~rl 14 ~nf1Hltm ftjqr~ ~HlTfltlTI t I ~ middotf
ltflit tmlrT f~llllqQ j1 m~~l ~~ODI) 10 ~~ ~i P)~ ojlt ~(li) ~ 3(~) tfJ
Jfjlaquor tllWiI ltP) n~~~T tlIltpfn ~ WIf ~q ~irif ~r-~~(~ J~~IO~Qjil1011 ifil ~l ~1 tll) q(rn flTljlif ilipf ~rr~lT filj([ 3Jri IfltH mr4 lfll~ middotltlVImiddot l rt1j~1 TllJfll u)jlJOrm WfTUf-tl-f ~nt1q q~ ftrrr ~Jll~1 I - ~~i~
It ~rJnun- rlgt~ll IIE-IT Illllr - - (~ Ff - lorTI r 1lll-r lIT lt1-tT l IIIt)f II ~il~ IQC1(middot tli iYJ ctmiddot 11~ -- OJ J ~~~ middot~ I1 r )i
4Tfucq -t r~ trqri ~H ~~(i~lr xd (ll r 7iicjllf(oJl cltH 3rtii~ ~mur ri ~~ frml-r 111ci~1IRtji ~iTn ~UTfj~~~~ flq~i lUr 1IM-T6 I rr
u rhmiddot~rirr qj[ r-lt~iyenil~ 11( 1 -Wu-v ~~~1Jtmiddot~OO lr(~ Qf~~F~rll (Gn~IJFH) cii bullbulltI bull
bull rt- f1 n-~ ~ I i n -]
G f4-m fltMFT um ~lil lt~r if~U41 1~J-- i4~))if i-~ flfW-lIO ftjrltfgt 24GfliJ 0 IrJ ~~ ~~f( l1GI1 ltJi tnl ~ I
7 ~IfT ltliT fniJittTIU -(Hi if r11U 61 lLlJ f)nH ii1~1J JI~~rn -~~j~ I -g1 ltojflF[ ur -Jh 1 1it ~ h I ~
ol-t fl( q Ir ~ middot 0 ~
J~)() tmfuPTI ~ IlJ1Ill1U 6- ll middot(l
~ll ~t~IrIffi~~---- -gt --0 ~ ~~ - ~- ~~~-lt-~ -~ ~
n middot -r-~- i--
- ~ (-ill~ 1~~r gt-) (~ ~ ~
middotlfli~ iI~
fd mfllHmiddotlipli11 ~ n~ 1S1ml ~Gl1Jmiddot 4
l-fImiddottvHrd L ) t ~ gt11 I ~I ~i ~~ltirfl 1iOf-~ ampwr -~I I ~ ~ lo-~ r yC- ~
1( ~ ~ ~
~~ a~ r
bull ~
I tJltt-J Iic ~ l~~J 12L13 12 ~Lk Lmiddot I+i Iii 6 ~bt( ~LI
lt ~~h 1middot~middot_b~ - y~
~
I lJ~lt IncPJtl ltJ~ ill ~(~~) R-c2f-rJVr I ~1~1J~ ~Ih l-lLI1hll middotb~)llJC~1pound2 cl~~~ CD ~middotlgtJl) ~till (pound)
I ~~-ltd~~JLllLUC ~tt~poundQ(tl8bullil)JJl1-l812 tamplt (Z) 1~middotJJLlJthJ~~tmiddotJtllt~~~f-I=CII~ lJ~JitBh~ (~)
- ~t(JI(jK
JLlttlD ~ll~I~~1 ~~ln i2~u
middotL~~llci middot J~(JiILlt
~1~Hc ll0
(12 ~~Lt lSb ~I)_ middot 1
I (
I ~ h)Jdl~ JlllIg Ilyen~~t lj ~ Jc~19-h ~ ltlpll~ ~
tlJJ~ltQ ~~J ~~ ~S pound6S89 tD~f2 ~Q-tilliP~l5-JJ) ~cQ JJJf-iJll ~Li llii2
I ~0~l~tillt ~-hl kPJL lltJli)Jll~ ~ ~ 7-l1 l-~
Hg~ Qhlh
RJ~t1t ~jJJlil ~l0
C~U~~~) ~~~ LJ K ~
toozm J-wJvt1-~hlt~ii~-middotihb)ik~
LtlJt~t HJ~ lJ-lh l2t-th 1~JjlrTl~li mh
-----_- q -=- bull-~- -
-)l~i ~~ middotf bull bull bull ~ J ~_ _ _ __ bull bull
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
f The Project Authorities replied that the command area of the project falls
in Annupur amp Dindori districts a tribal area in Madhya Pradesh As such the BC ratio is well with in the permissible limits (1)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
7 Shelgaon Barrage Project (New-Medium) Maharashtra
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Shelgaon Barrage a medium irrigation project envisages construction of 41965 m long barrage across river Tapi in Tapi basin The project is located near village Shelgaon in the Jalgaon district of Maharashtra The project is planned to irrigate annually an area of 11318 ha (CCA-9589 ha) benefiting 19 villages of Jalgaon district
The project envisages construction of the following main components
i) A 419 65 m long barrage with 18 Nos of radial gates of size 1830 m x 1676m
ii) A 465 m long left side earthen embankment and 165 m long saddle earthen embankment with a top width of 75 m
iii) An intake well of size 3 m x 11 m and jack well of size 9 m x 24 m along with 5 Nos of VT pumps of 1400 HP
The estimated cost of the project has been finalized for Rs 44649 crore at 2008-09 price level with BC ratio as 186 State Finance Concurrence has already been obtained
Chairman asked why the irrigation cost per hectare is so high The representative from the Govt of Maharashtra replied that the project is basically a lift irrigation scheme As such the irrigation cost per hectare is high
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should be completed by March 2014 and no further timecost overrun would be considered by the Committee
8 Rengali Irrigation Sub-project LBC-II (Revised-Major) Orissa
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The Rengali Irrigation Sub-project LBC-II Orissa was earlier considered and accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 65th meeting held on 14696 for Rs 70515 at 1995 price level Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment clearance to this project in July 1997 for providing irrigation to CCA of 93501 ha with 90 intensity of irrigation
The proposal envisages completion of all works of Left Bank Canal from 30 km to 141 km with head discharge of 13222 cumec to irrigate the CCA of 93501 ha
()
The present proposal is a revised cost estimate and there is no change in the scope of the project The revised cost has been finalized in CWC for Rs 195834 crore at 2009-10 price level with BC ratio as 1986 State Finance concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-V)
Secretary (WR) obseNed that work programme is too lengthy As such he desired that the work schedule should be revised in such a way that the project should be completed by March 2015 It was also decided that no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject to the aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
9 Kachnoda Dam project (Revised-Major) Uttar Pradesh
CE (PLlO) cwe briefly introduced the project proposal Kachnoda dam project was considered and accepted in the 87th TAC meeting held on 17112006 Planning Commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal in Jan 2007 for Rs 8867 crore at 2004 price level for providing irrigation to 11 699 ha of CCA and annual irrigation to the tune of 10850 ha
The project envisages construction of following main components
a) 41 km long and 16 m high earthen dam with a live storage of 5464 Million Cubic Metre
b) An ogee shaped masonry spillway of 127 m length with 9 nos vertical gates of size 12 x 71 m each to pass maximum flood discharge of 6038 cumec
c) Left main canal of length 154 km with head discharge of 3 cumec and Right main canal of length 84 km with head discharge of 275 cumec with their distribution systems to provide irrigation to an area of 5173 ha of CCA
d) Apart from above irrigation facilities to 6096 ha under existing Lalitpur canal system and 430 ha under existing Dilwara distributory of Jamni canal are also proposed to be brought under command of Kachnoda dam project
The present revised cost estimate is without change in scope and the revised cost has been finalized for Rs 42345 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 109 State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-VI) Chairman observed that BC ratio of the project proposal is very marginal but keeping the chronic drought prone area of command the proposal may be accepted subject to the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject tothe aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
7
10 Flood protection works to Brahmani-Kelua-Birupa Doab of Brahmani system (Flood Control) Orissa
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood protection to provide protection to 17100 area in Jaipur district of Orissa The proposal
a) Raising and strengthening of existing embankments -8649km
b) Construction of new embankment at - 1583 km
c) Construction of spurs - 24 Nos
d) Renovation of drains - 3750 km
e) Construction of sluices 10 Nos
f) Construction of launching aprons - 2000 m
g) Construction service roads 56 km
The cost of the scheme has been finalized by CWC for Rs 6232 crore at price level with BC ratio as 1 The State Finance Concurrence has
been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VII) On query related to provision of launching aprons it was clarified by Project officials that there would provision of the aprons where are considered essential It was further informed by the project authority that project was formulated on the of model study carried out by 11 Chennai
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should completed by March 2013 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
11 Revised Project Estimate for construction of Right Marginal Bund on river Ganga from Bhogpur to Balawali (Flood Control) Dist Haridwar Uttarakhand
CE (PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 40460 persons and provide protection to 9000 ha land in 10 villages of Uttarakhand from the fury of flood
scheme was originally sanctioned for Rs 11 crore for providing protection along river Ganga in a length of 205 km Due to cost escalation only 105 m of embankment is being constructed by the Gov with 11 crore as earlier approved The scheme is an ongoing under Management Programme MoWR The Empowered Committee in July 2009 decided that the cost of the scheme may allowed to revise the price level of March 2008
The present proposal envisages Construction of embankment of remaining 10 km length in a stretch of the river from 105 km 205
8
The present revised estimate of flood control scheme has been examined in GFCC and finalized for Rs 2069 crore with BC ratio as 509 The State Finance Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VIII) Commissioner (Ganga) advised the Govt of Uttarakhand to send scheme-wise budget allocation for project in question
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
12 Scheme for Desilting of river Ichamati along the common Border portion for better drainage and flood management (Flood Control) West Bengal
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 984 lakhs and to provide protection of 225 sq km area The proposal envisages
a) Desilting of river Ichamati by means of suitable floating type excavator mounted on pontoon (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 15 28000 cum)
b) Desilting of river Ichamati by manual labour within clmr land and depositing the excavated earth at suitable distance (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 139000 cum)
c) Total length of excavationdesilting is 20415 km
GFCC has finalized the cost of the project for Rs 3823 crore with BC ratio as 637 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IX)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with Vote of thanks to the Chair
9
Annexure-l 10sth Meeting of Advisory Committee
bull LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
fVembers of the Committee
SI ShriMrs 1 UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair 2 Allanya Ray Financial Advisor Ministry of Water Resources Member 3 Avinash Misbra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Planning Member
Commission) 4 Saidul Haq Hydrologist ( Representing Chairh1an CGWB) Member 5 JSBawa Director (HPampI) CEA (Representing Centra Electricity Member
Authority) () S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO cwe New D~lhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees a Ministry of water Resources
7 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MoWR b) Central vVater Commission
~ R C lha Member (RM) CWC New Delhi lty Jndra Raj Member (WPampP) 10 ~ K lYOlhi Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi II S K Chaudhary Chief Engineer (FM) ewc New Delhi 12 T S Patil Chid Engineer (MCO) CWC Nagpur
deg1 3 M K Sinha Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New Delhi 14 BG Kaushik Chief Engineer (PPO) CWC New Delhi 15 V K Chawla Chief Engineer (lMO) CWC New Delhi 10 Y K Sharma Chief Engineer (IBO) cwe Chandigarh 17 KN Keslui Chief Engineer (LGBO) CWC Patna 1~ G S Tyagi Director UTampSS CWC New Delhi 19 Gorakh Thakur Director CA-l CWC New Delhi 20 Ajay KumarDirector PA (N) cwe New Delhi 2L D M Raipure Dixector Appraisal CWC Nagpur -
22 P C ]ha Director PA-C CWC New Delhi middot -lt
4-middotM middot ~ 23 R K Kanodia Director PA-S CWC New Delhi
24 M W Paunikar DD PA-N CWC New Delhi 25 B Rai DD PA-C CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC 26 AK GanjuChairman GFCC Patna 27 S Masood Husain Member (Planning) GFCC Patna
d) State Governmenofficers Bihar
28 Ajay Nayak PriRcipal Secretary WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 29 SiJsil Kumar Singh SE WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 30 P K lha Resident Engineer Govt of Bihar
Chattisgarh 31 B K Rai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur 32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
middot33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur 34 BK Pndey AE Bilaspur
Chattisgarh
3~~~ BKRai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur
32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur
34 B K Pndey A E Bilaspur
Madhya Pradesh F
35 KN Agarwal Member Engineering NVDA Bhopal ~ KC Chauhan Chief Engineer Lower Narmada Projects Indore 37 OPJadhau Chief Engineer Rani Awauli Baisugar Project Bayi Hills
Jabalpur 38 PN Sharma Executive Engineer Man Project Division
Maharashtra
39 HK Tonpe Chief Engineer Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 40 VR Bhure SE Jalgaon Irrigation Project Jalgaon 41 CS Modak ED Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 42 SN Patil Executive Engineer Jalgaon
Orissa
43 DK Das Additional Secretary WRD Govt of Orissa Bhubaneswar
M Harish ChBehera Engineer-in-Chief Water Resources Bhubaneswar
45 Chakradhar Mohnta CEampBM Brahmani Lfet Basin Angul
~ Basudev Mohapatra SE Eastern Circle Cuttak
47 Gopal Krishna Behera EE OECF Divn VIBhuban
~ Subrat Das EE Jaraka Irrigation Divn Jaraka
Uttar Pradesh
49 S Ahmad Engineer-in- Chief Irrigation Deptt
50 SP Singh SE Irrigation Deptt
51 Avinash Misra AE ICD-ILalipur
52 AKNiranjan AE ICD-IIILalipur
Uattarkhand
53 Rajeev Gupta Principal Secretary Govt of Uttarakhand Dehradun
~ AK Dinker SE Irrigation Works Circle Dehradun
55 DD Dalal EE Dehradun
West Bengal
~ TK Ghosh Chief Engineer IampW Deptt Kolkata West Bengal
57 S Konar Se Greater Kolkata Drainage Circle West Bengal
~ltcl (bullbull M2~Vlimikillgal~(hi~middot7 20 j 0shy
G~t cf CihOl WjlCr tsrmiddottlrCcs j)cplitmellt
Fron Fr Aji~ i(UlH-l Sarnjya
~---
loinl S-rtlilf (ngiwcril)~)
ro Sri 0 Thkw [iii ~Itp A-~1
Centrill ~atcr ( onunissm W7 (~-rl )tli BhltlwaJl l~ K -la1f1 New D~thi
lt ~r
Prtn1 diil0d r 6 q20 10
S~Lgt S~te f jlli[tCf CQnCUlTc je for rc3lotat ion work (If Elll (t~rn G)JldHJlaquo_~ltid Systcm (MltiurKRcvi~-d) fsihar
1 Ref- Yo~~r leu no n p2TOI )middotPA(lli 14~lti) dilW tj-(c2(JO
~
Dcnr Sir I ino (11 uin(te~l (I) coves tL tiliwial CIiC1rCnc~ r~ ll 1stumt1olt ()r
q)rk of Ea5lcr~Gmi~ Caxal S)MI~nt Cv1~iol l(evis~d) Dihur coHting H3 6)4 n (W(~
~Hx Hundr()(J Eil~htyF(hl Omiddotm amp Se~mly J~i~~illakh) under rUJ Il1tkr CClltrall)~Ji
~dlHn~ ( 00 Cclrl~ A ~~str~
Co)Pf )f prxc~(~3 Jf FlHpoc~rd Ccrlfllj~e (iS1 Srbcme) OOVrtlJI1(J)( or 13 Uli1 i~ Cl1(ued for rjity rcI~ltlle $
Th~a ~ [0] )0) ~ llG ironnniol1 ar l nm ~~fll ~ctir)1
En()IIr A alxmiddotyc
i
~ rr
j L0-shy
XOW3 failltfui ly te~ ~~~ --P A---i-~r- --( shyV V ~ ~TI ~
(Ajit Kur1gtr Silhniyar) I
Joilt Se(fct~i nlbii-~e(e)
I
J i ~ middot kl If middot shy~ ~ I
( ~ 4- bull bull
~
~ ~ ( J
~~ 1 1
I
middotr ti bull~ 0 middot [
~~~~~
~ ~ tmiddot
amp
) t i
rI
i k ~~ ~
r ~_ r~ It- ~ -r ~ --~oolt_ _ bull _ ll 1 -- ~ ~- a U -nT
n)~~ ~ ~ lmiddot bull ( I 1 it toO l i 1
I bullbullbullfy ( -1 ~- A1J ~ 1 ) ~ ~~ If ~ A I J ~
~ ~~ i j ~ t ] ~ t -+J
Jro)lllt ti tTl bull - 4 li 1 ~ J
lICT cf~InN l1nlf1r ~imp~
~Jl ir)~llr ft1P_~ T~r~
ifgtLJi ltP If 3) V Tr-(J_I) 1 ~1--21 oon ~rt1~~rr11rltLI 00 2010 )In
~Q ~f1lQm
r14l middot~I ~rz MI ~mu~~ lnf[lf middot)~Q~IttJ~ (poundPc)
[q7~- t~QTm11 Itl~ f ftllmr~r~I~(i3q)cr~qt tPl tlt~~r i6fnIlT I$~~i lrmfl ~ Rlf~lr ~ji~ill~~II (iIll q~l ~l~~m u~IW61~ ~4li~hJ I
~~t- ~~ ~r~r qjq~ w~5li 1 ~t-O21J0(l ~cI~[lF $liqj 1fUl02010 --0(J--gt bull
~Vlaquo mmf 1~~r31Jgt f~) til 1~irHlU~ ~il~rltillli~~fr qiT lifiiTJ J1lt1~ ltt tV3( W1rltlr W RfF~~fT ti iffit~r Qi11l ~ ~ 1fJ1 V (fj~)~ (i 1ifl ~ ~~ r
~l 71Rt T1T~) tt WTWj(f) $1 ~~ltr~tITtra J~II~(l ~netT ftT ~r H wrr ~m f1 fir ~16-rr r ~ -rRfgt -i~it r~ ~1 Ii1~jii 11 middotR1~rtr mn Glom ltmr~1 lt~ T~rl ~~ -xi) 2252
iil~ r~ -ltltir-- qrlt em i11tft1 qtllr 3Ii I1~r -iI middot~tmx 1tVn tj~r AlfJP l~ 3i~h1 r
~~ r-~ KI ~rFl qA ~lImiddoti-eltl r~1 in0- iv~ III i gt
t~
2 1iWf-n ~t 0300 (~h$rlt Ulfit1 ~q 7500 ~IH1r T~l i~il 15eOJ t-qtm ~rl 14 ~nf1Hltm ftjqr~ ~HlTfltlTI t I ~ middotf
ltflit tmlrT f~llllqQ j1 m~~l ~~ODI) 10 ~~ ~i P)~ ojlt ~(li) ~ 3(~) tfJ
Jfjlaquor tllWiI ltP) n~~~T tlIltpfn ~ WIf ~q ~irif ~r-~~(~ J~~IO~Qjil1011 ifil ~l ~1 tll) q(rn flTljlif ilipf ~rr~lT filj([ 3Jri IfltH mr4 lfll~ middotltlVImiddot l rt1j~1 TllJfll u)jlJOrm WfTUf-tl-f ~nt1q q~ ftrrr ~Jll~1 I - ~~i~
It ~rJnun- rlgt~ll IIE-IT Illllr - - (~ Ff - lorTI r 1lll-r lIT lt1-tT l IIIt)f II ~il~ IQC1(middot tli iYJ ctmiddot 11~ -- OJ J ~~~ middot~ I1 r )i
4Tfucq -t r~ trqri ~H ~~(i~lr xd (ll r 7iicjllf(oJl cltH 3rtii~ ~mur ri ~~ frml-r 111ci~1IRtji ~iTn ~UTfj~~~~ flq~i lUr 1IM-T6 I rr
u rhmiddot~rirr qj[ r-lt~iyenil~ 11( 1 -Wu-v ~~~1Jtmiddot~OO lr(~ Qf~~F~rll (Gn~IJFH) cii bullbulltI bull
bull rt- f1 n-~ ~ I i n -]
G f4-m fltMFT um ~lil lt~r if~U41 1~J-- i4~))if i-~ flfW-lIO ftjrltfgt 24GfliJ 0 IrJ ~~ ~~f( l1GI1 ltJi tnl ~ I
7 ~IfT ltliT fniJittTIU -(Hi if r11U 61 lLlJ f)nH ii1~1J JI~~rn -~~j~ I -g1 ltojflF[ ur -Jh 1 1it ~ h I ~
ol-t fl( q Ir ~ middot 0 ~
J~)() tmfuPTI ~ IlJ1Ill1U 6- ll middot(l
~ll ~t~IrIffi~~---- -gt --0 ~ ~~ - ~- ~~~-lt-~ -~ ~
n middot -r-~- i--
- ~ (-ill~ 1~~r gt-) (~ ~ ~
middotlfli~ iI~
fd mfllHmiddotlipli11 ~ n~ 1S1ml ~Gl1Jmiddot 4
l-fImiddottvHrd L ) t ~ gt11 I ~I ~i ~~ltirfl 1iOf-~ ampwr -~I I ~ ~ lo-~ r yC- ~
1( ~ ~ ~
~~ a~ r
bull ~
I tJltt-J Iic ~ l~~J 12L13 12 ~Lk Lmiddot I+i Iii 6 ~bt( ~LI
lt ~~h 1middot~middot_b~ - y~
~
I lJ~lt IncPJtl ltJ~ ill ~(~~) R-c2f-rJVr I ~1~1J~ ~Ih l-lLI1hll middotb~)llJC~1pound2 cl~~~ CD ~middotlgtJl) ~till (pound)
I ~~-ltd~~JLllLUC ~tt~poundQ(tl8bullil)JJl1-l812 tamplt (Z) 1~middotJJLlJthJ~~tmiddotJtllt~~~f-I=CII~ lJ~JitBh~ (~)
- ~t(JI(jK
JLlttlD ~ll~I~~1 ~~ln i2~u
middotL~~llci middot J~(JiILlt
~1~Hc ll0
(12 ~~Lt lSb ~I)_ middot 1
I (
I ~ h)Jdl~ JlllIg Ilyen~~t lj ~ Jc~19-h ~ ltlpll~ ~
tlJJ~ltQ ~~J ~~ ~S pound6S89 tD~f2 ~Q-tilliP~l5-JJ) ~cQ JJJf-iJll ~Li llii2
I ~0~l~tillt ~-hl kPJL lltJli)Jll~ ~ ~ 7-l1 l-~
Hg~ Qhlh
RJ~t1t ~jJJlil ~l0
C~U~~~) ~~~ LJ K ~
toozm J-wJvt1-~hlt~ii~-middotihb)ik~
LtlJt~t HJ~ lJ-lh l2t-th 1~JjlrTl~li mh
-----_- q -=- bull-~- -
-)l~i ~~ middotf bull bull bull ~ J ~_ _ _ __ bull bull
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
The present proposal is a revised cost estimate and there is no change in the scope of the project The revised cost has been finalized in CWC for Rs 195834 crore at 2009-10 price level with BC ratio as 1986 State Finance concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-V)
Secretary (WR) obseNed that work programme is too lengthy As such he desired that the work schedule should be revised in such a way that the project should be completed by March 2015 It was also decided that no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject to the aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
9 Kachnoda Dam project (Revised-Major) Uttar Pradesh
CE (PLlO) cwe briefly introduced the project proposal Kachnoda dam project was considered and accepted in the 87th TAC meeting held on 17112006 Planning Commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal in Jan 2007 for Rs 8867 crore at 2004 price level for providing irrigation to 11 699 ha of CCA and annual irrigation to the tune of 10850 ha
The project envisages construction of following main components
a) 41 km long and 16 m high earthen dam with a live storage of 5464 Million Cubic Metre
b) An ogee shaped masonry spillway of 127 m length with 9 nos vertical gates of size 12 x 71 m each to pass maximum flood discharge of 6038 cumec
c) Left main canal of length 154 km with head discharge of 3 cumec and Right main canal of length 84 km with head discharge of 275 cumec with their distribution systems to provide irrigation to an area of 5173 ha of CCA
d) Apart from above irrigation facilities to 6096 ha under existing Lalitpur canal system and 430 ha under existing Dilwara distributory of Jamni canal are also proposed to be brought under command of Kachnoda dam project
The present revised cost estimate is without change in scope and the revised cost has been finalized for Rs 42345 crore at 2009 price level with BC ratio as 109 State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-VI) Chairman observed that BC ratio of the project proposal is very marginal but keeping the chronic drought prone area of command the proposal may be accepted subject to the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun shall be considered by the Committee
Subject tothe aforesaid condition the Committee accepted the proposal
7
10 Flood protection works to Brahmani-Kelua-Birupa Doab of Brahmani system (Flood Control) Orissa
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood protection to provide protection to 17100 area in Jaipur district of Orissa The proposal
a) Raising and strengthening of existing embankments -8649km
b) Construction of new embankment at - 1583 km
c) Construction of spurs - 24 Nos
d) Renovation of drains - 3750 km
e) Construction of sluices 10 Nos
f) Construction of launching aprons - 2000 m
g) Construction service roads 56 km
The cost of the scheme has been finalized by CWC for Rs 6232 crore at price level with BC ratio as 1 The State Finance Concurrence has
been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VII) On query related to provision of launching aprons it was clarified by Project officials that there would provision of the aprons where are considered essential It was further informed by the project authority that project was formulated on the of model study carried out by 11 Chennai
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should completed by March 2013 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
11 Revised Project Estimate for construction of Right Marginal Bund on river Ganga from Bhogpur to Balawali (Flood Control) Dist Haridwar Uttarakhand
CE (PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 40460 persons and provide protection to 9000 ha land in 10 villages of Uttarakhand from the fury of flood
scheme was originally sanctioned for Rs 11 crore for providing protection along river Ganga in a length of 205 km Due to cost escalation only 105 m of embankment is being constructed by the Gov with 11 crore as earlier approved The scheme is an ongoing under Management Programme MoWR The Empowered Committee in July 2009 decided that the cost of the scheme may allowed to revise the price level of March 2008
The present proposal envisages Construction of embankment of remaining 10 km length in a stretch of the river from 105 km 205
8
The present revised estimate of flood control scheme has been examined in GFCC and finalized for Rs 2069 crore with BC ratio as 509 The State Finance Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VIII) Commissioner (Ganga) advised the Govt of Uttarakhand to send scheme-wise budget allocation for project in question
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
12 Scheme for Desilting of river Ichamati along the common Border portion for better drainage and flood management (Flood Control) West Bengal
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 984 lakhs and to provide protection of 225 sq km area The proposal envisages
a) Desilting of river Ichamati by means of suitable floating type excavator mounted on pontoon (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 15 28000 cum)
b) Desilting of river Ichamati by manual labour within clmr land and depositing the excavated earth at suitable distance (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 139000 cum)
c) Total length of excavationdesilting is 20415 km
GFCC has finalized the cost of the project for Rs 3823 crore with BC ratio as 637 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IX)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with Vote of thanks to the Chair
9
Annexure-l 10sth Meeting of Advisory Committee
bull LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
fVembers of the Committee
SI ShriMrs 1 UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair 2 Allanya Ray Financial Advisor Ministry of Water Resources Member 3 Avinash Misbra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Planning Member
Commission) 4 Saidul Haq Hydrologist ( Representing Chairh1an CGWB) Member 5 JSBawa Director (HPampI) CEA (Representing Centra Electricity Member
Authority) () S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO cwe New D~lhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees a Ministry of water Resources
7 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MoWR b) Central vVater Commission
~ R C lha Member (RM) CWC New Delhi lty Jndra Raj Member (WPampP) 10 ~ K lYOlhi Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi II S K Chaudhary Chief Engineer (FM) ewc New Delhi 12 T S Patil Chid Engineer (MCO) CWC Nagpur
deg1 3 M K Sinha Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New Delhi 14 BG Kaushik Chief Engineer (PPO) CWC New Delhi 15 V K Chawla Chief Engineer (lMO) CWC New Delhi 10 Y K Sharma Chief Engineer (IBO) cwe Chandigarh 17 KN Keslui Chief Engineer (LGBO) CWC Patna 1~ G S Tyagi Director UTampSS CWC New Delhi 19 Gorakh Thakur Director CA-l CWC New Delhi 20 Ajay KumarDirector PA (N) cwe New Delhi 2L D M Raipure Dixector Appraisal CWC Nagpur -
22 P C ]ha Director PA-C CWC New Delhi middot -lt
4-middotM middot ~ 23 R K Kanodia Director PA-S CWC New Delhi
24 M W Paunikar DD PA-N CWC New Delhi 25 B Rai DD PA-C CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC 26 AK GanjuChairman GFCC Patna 27 S Masood Husain Member (Planning) GFCC Patna
d) State Governmenofficers Bihar
28 Ajay Nayak PriRcipal Secretary WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 29 SiJsil Kumar Singh SE WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 30 P K lha Resident Engineer Govt of Bihar
Chattisgarh 31 B K Rai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur 32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
middot33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur 34 BK Pndey AE Bilaspur
Chattisgarh
3~~~ BKRai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur
32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur
34 B K Pndey A E Bilaspur
Madhya Pradesh F
35 KN Agarwal Member Engineering NVDA Bhopal ~ KC Chauhan Chief Engineer Lower Narmada Projects Indore 37 OPJadhau Chief Engineer Rani Awauli Baisugar Project Bayi Hills
Jabalpur 38 PN Sharma Executive Engineer Man Project Division
Maharashtra
39 HK Tonpe Chief Engineer Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 40 VR Bhure SE Jalgaon Irrigation Project Jalgaon 41 CS Modak ED Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 42 SN Patil Executive Engineer Jalgaon
Orissa
43 DK Das Additional Secretary WRD Govt of Orissa Bhubaneswar
M Harish ChBehera Engineer-in-Chief Water Resources Bhubaneswar
45 Chakradhar Mohnta CEampBM Brahmani Lfet Basin Angul
~ Basudev Mohapatra SE Eastern Circle Cuttak
47 Gopal Krishna Behera EE OECF Divn VIBhuban
~ Subrat Das EE Jaraka Irrigation Divn Jaraka
Uttar Pradesh
49 S Ahmad Engineer-in- Chief Irrigation Deptt
50 SP Singh SE Irrigation Deptt
51 Avinash Misra AE ICD-ILalipur
52 AKNiranjan AE ICD-IIILalipur
Uattarkhand
53 Rajeev Gupta Principal Secretary Govt of Uttarakhand Dehradun
~ AK Dinker SE Irrigation Works Circle Dehradun
55 DD Dalal EE Dehradun
West Bengal
~ TK Ghosh Chief Engineer IampW Deptt Kolkata West Bengal
57 S Konar Se Greater Kolkata Drainage Circle West Bengal
~ltcl (bullbull M2~Vlimikillgal~(hi~middot7 20 j 0shy
G~t cf CihOl WjlCr tsrmiddottlrCcs j)cplitmellt
Fron Fr Aji~ i(UlH-l Sarnjya
~---
loinl S-rtlilf (ngiwcril)~)
ro Sri 0 Thkw [iii ~Itp A-~1
Centrill ~atcr ( onunissm W7 (~-rl )tli BhltlwaJl l~ K -la1f1 New D~thi
lt ~r
Prtn1 diil0d r 6 q20 10
S~Lgt S~te f jlli[tCf CQnCUlTc je for rc3lotat ion work (If Elll (t~rn G)JldHJlaquo_~ltid Systcm (MltiurKRcvi~-d) fsihar
1 Ref- Yo~~r leu no n p2TOI )middotPA(lli 14~lti) dilW tj-(c2(JO
~
Dcnr Sir I ino (11 uin(te~l (I) coves tL tiliwial CIiC1rCnc~ r~ ll 1stumt1olt ()r
q)rk of Ea5lcr~Gmi~ Caxal S)MI~nt Cv1~iol l(evis~d) Dihur coHting H3 6)4 n (W(~
~Hx Hundr()(J Eil~htyF(hl Omiddotm amp Se~mly J~i~~illakh) under rUJ Il1tkr CClltrall)~Ji
~dlHn~ ( 00 Cclrl~ A ~~str~
Co)Pf )f prxc~(~3 Jf FlHpoc~rd Ccrlfllj~e (iS1 Srbcme) OOVrtlJI1(J)( or 13 Uli1 i~ Cl1(ued for rjity rcI~ltlle $
Th~a ~ [0] )0) ~ llG ironnniol1 ar l nm ~~fll ~ctir)1
En()IIr A alxmiddotyc
i
~ rr
j L0-shy
XOW3 failltfui ly te~ ~~~ --P A---i-~r- --( shyV V ~ ~TI ~
(Ajit Kur1gtr Silhniyar) I
Joilt Se(fct~i nlbii-~e(e)
I
J i ~ middot kl If middot shy~ ~ I
( ~ 4- bull bull
~
~ ~ ( J
~~ 1 1
I
middotr ti bull~ 0 middot [
~~~~~
~ ~ tmiddot
amp
) t i
rI
i k ~~ ~
r ~_ r~ It- ~ -r ~ --~oolt_ _ bull _ ll 1 -- ~ ~- a U -nT
n)~~ ~ ~ lmiddot bull ( I 1 it toO l i 1
I bullbullbullfy ( -1 ~- A1J ~ 1 ) ~ ~~ If ~ A I J ~
~ ~~ i j ~ t ] ~ t -+J
Jro)lllt ti tTl bull - 4 li 1 ~ J
lICT cf~InN l1nlf1r ~imp~
~Jl ir)~llr ft1P_~ T~r~
ifgtLJi ltP If 3) V Tr-(J_I) 1 ~1--21 oon ~rt1~~rr11rltLI 00 2010 )In
~Q ~f1lQm
r14l middot~I ~rz MI ~mu~~ lnf[lf middot)~Q~IttJ~ (poundPc)
[q7~- t~QTm11 Itl~ f ftllmr~r~I~(i3q)cr~qt tPl tlt~~r i6fnIlT I$~~i lrmfl ~ Rlf~lr ~ji~ill~~II (iIll q~l ~l~~m u~IW61~ ~4li~hJ I
~~t- ~~ ~r~r qjq~ w~5li 1 ~t-O21J0(l ~cI~[lF $liqj 1fUl02010 --0(J--gt bull
~Vlaquo mmf 1~~r31Jgt f~) til 1~irHlU~ ~il~rltillli~~fr qiT lifiiTJ J1lt1~ ltt tV3( W1rltlr W RfF~~fT ti iffit~r Qi11l ~ ~ 1fJ1 V (fj~)~ (i 1ifl ~ ~~ r
~l 71Rt T1T~) tt WTWj(f) $1 ~~ltr~tITtra J~II~(l ~netT ftT ~r H wrr ~m f1 fir ~16-rr r ~ -rRfgt -i~it r~ ~1 Ii1~jii 11 middotR1~rtr mn Glom ltmr~1 lt~ T~rl ~~ -xi) 2252
iil~ r~ -ltltir-- qrlt em i11tft1 qtllr 3Ii I1~r -iI middot~tmx 1tVn tj~r AlfJP l~ 3i~h1 r
~~ r-~ KI ~rFl qA ~lImiddoti-eltl r~1 in0- iv~ III i gt
t~
2 1iWf-n ~t 0300 (~h$rlt Ulfit1 ~q 7500 ~IH1r T~l i~il 15eOJ t-qtm ~rl 14 ~nf1Hltm ftjqr~ ~HlTfltlTI t I ~ middotf
ltflit tmlrT f~llllqQ j1 m~~l ~~ODI) 10 ~~ ~i P)~ ojlt ~(li) ~ 3(~) tfJ
Jfjlaquor tllWiI ltP) n~~~T tlIltpfn ~ WIf ~q ~irif ~r-~~(~ J~~IO~Qjil1011 ifil ~l ~1 tll) q(rn flTljlif ilipf ~rr~lT filj([ 3Jri IfltH mr4 lfll~ middotltlVImiddot l rt1j~1 TllJfll u)jlJOrm WfTUf-tl-f ~nt1q q~ ftrrr ~Jll~1 I - ~~i~
It ~rJnun- rlgt~ll IIE-IT Illllr - - (~ Ff - lorTI r 1lll-r lIT lt1-tT l IIIt)f II ~il~ IQC1(middot tli iYJ ctmiddot 11~ -- OJ J ~~~ middot~ I1 r )i
4Tfucq -t r~ trqri ~H ~~(i~lr xd (ll r 7iicjllf(oJl cltH 3rtii~ ~mur ri ~~ frml-r 111ci~1IRtji ~iTn ~UTfj~~~~ flq~i lUr 1IM-T6 I rr
u rhmiddot~rirr qj[ r-lt~iyenil~ 11( 1 -Wu-v ~~~1Jtmiddot~OO lr(~ Qf~~F~rll (Gn~IJFH) cii bullbulltI bull
bull rt- f1 n-~ ~ I i n -]
G f4-m fltMFT um ~lil lt~r if~U41 1~J-- i4~))if i-~ flfW-lIO ftjrltfgt 24GfliJ 0 IrJ ~~ ~~f( l1GI1 ltJi tnl ~ I
7 ~IfT ltliT fniJittTIU -(Hi if r11U 61 lLlJ f)nH ii1~1J JI~~rn -~~j~ I -g1 ltojflF[ ur -Jh 1 1it ~ h I ~
ol-t fl( q Ir ~ middot 0 ~
J~)() tmfuPTI ~ IlJ1Ill1U 6- ll middot(l
~ll ~t~IrIffi~~---- -gt --0 ~ ~~ - ~- ~~~-lt-~ -~ ~
n middot -r-~- i--
- ~ (-ill~ 1~~r gt-) (~ ~ ~
middotlfli~ iI~
fd mfllHmiddotlipli11 ~ n~ 1S1ml ~Gl1Jmiddot 4
l-fImiddottvHrd L ) t ~ gt11 I ~I ~i ~~ltirfl 1iOf-~ ampwr -~I I ~ ~ lo-~ r yC- ~
1( ~ ~ ~
~~ a~ r
bull ~
I tJltt-J Iic ~ l~~J 12L13 12 ~Lk Lmiddot I+i Iii 6 ~bt( ~LI
lt ~~h 1middot~middot_b~ - y~
~
I lJ~lt IncPJtl ltJ~ ill ~(~~) R-c2f-rJVr I ~1~1J~ ~Ih l-lLI1hll middotb~)llJC~1pound2 cl~~~ CD ~middotlgtJl) ~till (pound)
I ~~-ltd~~JLllLUC ~tt~poundQ(tl8bullil)JJl1-l812 tamplt (Z) 1~middotJJLlJthJ~~tmiddotJtllt~~~f-I=CII~ lJ~JitBh~ (~)
- ~t(JI(jK
JLlttlD ~ll~I~~1 ~~ln i2~u
middotL~~llci middot J~(JiILlt
~1~Hc ll0
(12 ~~Lt lSb ~I)_ middot 1
I (
I ~ h)Jdl~ JlllIg Ilyen~~t lj ~ Jc~19-h ~ ltlpll~ ~
tlJJ~ltQ ~~J ~~ ~S pound6S89 tD~f2 ~Q-tilliP~l5-JJ) ~cQ JJJf-iJll ~Li llii2
I ~0~l~tillt ~-hl kPJL lltJli)Jll~ ~ ~ 7-l1 l-~
Hg~ Qhlh
RJ~t1t ~jJJlil ~l0
C~U~~~) ~~~ LJ K ~
toozm J-wJvt1-~hlt~ii~-middotihb)ik~
LtlJt~t HJ~ lJ-lh l2t-th 1~JjlrTl~li mh
-----_- q -=- bull-~- -
-)l~i ~~ middotf bull bull bull ~ J ~_ _ _ __ bull bull
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
10 Flood protection works to Brahmani-Kelua-Birupa Doab of Brahmani system (Flood Control) Orissa
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood protection to provide protection to 17100 area in Jaipur district of Orissa The proposal
a) Raising and strengthening of existing embankments -8649km
b) Construction of new embankment at - 1583 km
c) Construction of spurs - 24 Nos
d) Renovation of drains - 3750 km
e) Construction of sluices 10 Nos
f) Construction of launching aprons - 2000 m
g) Construction service roads 56 km
The cost of the scheme has been finalized by CWC for Rs 6232 crore at price level with BC ratio as 1 The State Finance Concurrence has
been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VII) On query related to provision of launching aprons it was clarified by Project officials that there would provision of the aprons where are considered essential It was further informed by the project authority that project was formulated on the of model study carried out by 11 Chennai
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that project should completed by March 2013 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
11 Revised Project Estimate for construction of Right Marginal Bund on river Ganga from Bhogpur to Balawali (Flood Control) Dist Haridwar Uttarakhand
CE (PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 40460 persons and provide protection to 9000 ha land in 10 villages of Uttarakhand from the fury of flood
scheme was originally sanctioned for Rs 11 crore for providing protection along river Ganga in a length of 205 km Due to cost escalation only 105 m of embankment is being constructed by the Gov with 11 crore as earlier approved The scheme is an ongoing under Management Programme MoWR The Empowered Committee in July 2009 decided that the cost of the scheme may allowed to revise the price level of March 2008
The present proposal envisages Construction of embankment of remaining 10 km length in a stretch of the river from 105 km 205
8
The present revised estimate of flood control scheme has been examined in GFCC and finalized for Rs 2069 crore with BC ratio as 509 The State Finance Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VIII) Commissioner (Ganga) advised the Govt of Uttarakhand to send scheme-wise budget allocation for project in question
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
12 Scheme for Desilting of river Ichamati along the common Border portion for better drainage and flood management (Flood Control) West Bengal
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 984 lakhs and to provide protection of 225 sq km area The proposal envisages
a) Desilting of river Ichamati by means of suitable floating type excavator mounted on pontoon (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 15 28000 cum)
b) Desilting of river Ichamati by manual labour within clmr land and depositing the excavated earth at suitable distance (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 139000 cum)
c) Total length of excavationdesilting is 20415 km
GFCC has finalized the cost of the project for Rs 3823 crore with BC ratio as 637 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IX)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with Vote of thanks to the Chair
9
Annexure-l 10sth Meeting of Advisory Committee
bull LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
fVembers of the Committee
SI ShriMrs 1 UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair 2 Allanya Ray Financial Advisor Ministry of Water Resources Member 3 Avinash Misbra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Planning Member
Commission) 4 Saidul Haq Hydrologist ( Representing Chairh1an CGWB) Member 5 JSBawa Director (HPampI) CEA (Representing Centra Electricity Member
Authority) () S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO cwe New D~lhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees a Ministry of water Resources
7 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MoWR b) Central vVater Commission
~ R C lha Member (RM) CWC New Delhi lty Jndra Raj Member (WPampP) 10 ~ K lYOlhi Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi II S K Chaudhary Chief Engineer (FM) ewc New Delhi 12 T S Patil Chid Engineer (MCO) CWC Nagpur
deg1 3 M K Sinha Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New Delhi 14 BG Kaushik Chief Engineer (PPO) CWC New Delhi 15 V K Chawla Chief Engineer (lMO) CWC New Delhi 10 Y K Sharma Chief Engineer (IBO) cwe Chandigarh 17 KN Keslui Chief Engineer (LGBO) CWC Patna 1~ G S Tyagi Director UTampSS CWC New Delhi 19 Gorakh Thakur Director CA-l CWC New Delhi 20 Ajay KumarDirector PA (N) cwe New Delhi 2L D M Raipure Dixector Appraisal CWC Nagpur -
22 P C ]ha Director PA-C CWC New Delhi middot -lt
4-middotM middot ~ 23 R K Kanodia Director PA-S CWC New Delhi
24 M W Paunikar DD PA-N CWC New Delhi 25 B Rai DD PA-C CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC 26 AK GanjuChairman GFCC Patna 27 S Masood Husain Member (Planning) GFCC Patna
d) State Governmenofficers Bihar
28 Ajay Nayak PriRcipal Secretary WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 29 SiJsil Kumar Singh SE WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 30 P K lha Resident Engineer Govt of Bihar
Chattisgarh 31 B K Rai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur 32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
middot33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur 34 BK Pndey AE Bilaspur
Chattisgarh
3~~~ BKRai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur
32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur
34 B K Pndey A E Bilaspur
Madhya Pradesh F
35 KN Agarwal Member Engineering NVDA Bhopal ~ KC Chauhan Chief Engineer Lower Narmada Projects Indore 37 OPJadhau Chief Engineer Rani Awauli Baisugar Project Bayi Hills
Jabalpur 38 PN Sharma Executive Engineer Man Project Division
Maharashtra
39 HK Tonpe Chief Engineer Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 40 VR Bhure SE Jalgaon Irrigation Project Jalgaon 41 CS Modak ED Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 42 SN Patil Executive Engineer Jalgaon
Orissa
43 DK Das Additional Secretary WRD Govt of Orissa Bhubaneswar
M Harish ChBehera Engineer-in-Chief Water Resources Bhubaneswar
45 Chakradhar Mohnta CEampBM Brahmani Lfet Basin Angul
~ Basudev Mohapatra SE Eastern Circle Cuttak
47 Gopal Krishna Behera EE OECF Divn VIBhuban
~ Subrat Das EE Jaraka Irrigation Divn Jaraka
Uttar Pradesh
49 S Ahmad Engineer-in- Chief Irrigation Deptt
50 SP Singh SE Irrigation Deptt
51 Avinash Misra AE ICD-ILalipur
52 AKNiranjan AE ICD-IIILalipur
Uattarkhand
53 Rajeev Gupta Principal Secretary Govt of Uttarakhand Dehradun
~ AK Dinker SE Irrigation Works Circle Dehradun
55 DD Dalal EE Dehradun
West Bengal
~ TK Ghosh Chief Engineer IampW Deptt Kolkata West Bengal
57 S Konar Se Greater Kolkata Drainage Circle West Bengal
~ltcl (bullbull M2~Vlimikillgal~(hi~middot7 20 j 0shy
G~t cf CihOl WjlCr tsrmiddottlrCcs j)cplitmellt
Fron Fr Aji~ i(UlH-l Sarnjya
~---
loinl S-rtlilf (ngiwcril)~)
ro Sri 0 Thkw [iii ~Itp A-~1
Centrill ~atcr ( onunissm W7 (~-rl )tli BhltlwaJl l~ K -la1f1 New D~thi
lt ~r
Prtn1 diil0d r 6 q20 10
S~Lgt S~te f jlli[tCf CQnCUlTc je for rc3lotat ion work (If Elll (t~rn G)JldHJlaquo_~ltid Systcm (MltiurKRcvi~-d) fsihar
1 Ref- Yo~~r leu no n p2TOI )middotPA(lli 14~lti) dilW tj-(c2(JO
~
Dcnr Sir I ino (11 uin(te~l (I) coves tL tiliwial CIiC1rCnc~ r~ ll 1stumt1olt ()r
q)rk of Ea5lcr~Gmi~ Caxal S)MI~nt Cv1~iol l(evis~d) Dihur coHting H3 6)4 n (W(~
~Hx Hundr()(J Eil~htyF(hl Omiddotm amp Se~mly J~i~~illakh) under rUJ Il1tkr CClltrall)~Ji
~dlHn~ ( 00 Cclrl~ A ~~str~
Co)Pf )f prxc~(~3 Jf FlHpoc~rd Ccrlfllj~e (iS1 Srbcme) OOVrtlJI1(J)( or 13 Uli1 i~ Cl1(ued for rjity rcI~ltlle $
Th~a ~ [0] )0) ~ llG ironnniol1 ar l nm ~~fll ~ctir)1
En()IIr A alxmiddotyc
i
~ rr
j L0-shy
XOW3 failltfui ly te~ ~~~ --P A---i-~r- --( shyV V ~ ~TI ~
(Ajit Kur1gtr Silhniyar) I
Joilt Se(fct~i nlbii-~e(e)
I
J i ~ middot kl If middot shy~ ~ I
( ~ 4- bull bull
~
~ ~ ( J
~~ 1 1
I
middotr ti bull~ 0 middot [
~~~~~
~ ~ tmiddot
amp
) t i
rI
i k ~~ ~
r ~_ r~ It- ~ -r ~ --~oolt_ _ bull _ ll 1 -- ~ ~- a U -nT
n)~~ ~ ~ lmiddot bull ( I 1 it toO l i 1
I bullbullbullfy ( -1 ~- A1J ~ 1 ) ~ ~~ If ~ A I J ~
~ ~~ i j ~ t ] ~ t -+J
Jro)lllt ti tTl bull - 4 li 1 ~ J
lICT cf~InN l1nlf1r ~imp~
~Jl ir)~llr ft1P_~ T~r~
ifgtLJi ltP If 3) V Tr-(J_I) 1 ~1--21 oon ~rt1~~rr11rltLI 00 2010 )In
~Q ~f1lQm
r14l middot~I ~rz MI ~mu~~ lnf[lf middot)~Q~IttJ~ (poundPc)
[q7~- t~QTm11 Itl~ f ftllmr~r~I~(i3q)cr~qt tPl tlt~~r i6fnIlT I$~~i lrmfl ~ Rlf~lr ~ji~ill~~II (iIll q~l ~l~~m u~IW61~ ~4li~hJ I
~~t- ~~ ~r~r qjq~ w~5li 1 ~t-O21J0(l ~cI~[lF $liqj 1fUl02010 --0(J--gt bull
~Vlaquo mmf 1~~r31Jgt f~) til 1~irHlU~ ~il~rltillli~~fr qiT lifiiTJ J1lt1~ ltt tV3( W1rltlr W RfF~~fT ti iffit~r Qi11l ~ ~ 1fJ1 V (fj~)~ (i 1ifl ~ ~~ r
~l 71Rt T1T~) tt WTWj(f) $1 ~~ltr~tITtra J~II~(l ~netT ftT ~r H wrr ~m f1 fir ~16-rr r ~ -rRfgt -i~it r~ ~1 Ii1~jii 11 middotR1~rtr mn Glom ltmr~1 lt~ T~rl ~~ -xi) 2252
iil~ r~ -ltltir-- qrlt em i11tft1 qtllr 3Ii I1~r -iI middot~tmx 1tVn tj~r AlfJP l~ 3i~h1 r
~~ r-~ KI ~rFl qA ~lImiddoti-eltl r~1 in0- iv~ III i gt
t~
2 1iWf-n ~t 0300 (~h$rlt Ulfit1 ~q 7500 ~IH1r T~l i~il 15eOJ t-qtm ~rl 14 ~nf1Hltm ftjqr~ ~HlTfltlTI t I ~ middotf
ltflit tmlrT f~llllqQ j1 m~~l ~~ODI) 10 ~~ ~i P)~ ojlt ~(li) ~ 3(~) tfJ
Jfjlaquor tllWiI ltP) n~~~T tlIltpfn ~ WIf ~q ~irif ~r-~~(~ J~~IO~Qjil1011 ifil ~l ~1 tll) q(rn flTljlif ilipf ~rr~lT filj([ 3Jri IfltH mr4 lfll~ middotltlVImiddot l rt1j~1 TllJfll u)jlJOrm WfTUf-tl-f ~nt1q q~ ftrrr ~Jll~1 I - ~~i~
It ~rJnun- rlgt~ll IIE-IT Illllr - - (~ Ff - lorTI r 1lll-r lIT lt1-tT l IIIt)f II ~il~ IQC1(middot tli iYJ ctmiddot 11~ -- OJ J ~~~ middot~ I1 r )i
4Tfucq -t r~ trqri ~H ~~(i~lr xd (ll r 7iicjllf(oJl cltH 3rtii~ ~mur ri ~~ frml-r 111ci~1IRtji ~iTn ~UTfj~~~~ flq~i lUr 1IM-T6 I rr
u rhmiddot~rirr qj[ r-lt~iyenil~ 11( 1 -Wu-v ~~~1Jtmiddot~OO lr(~ Qf~~F~rll (Gn~IJFH) cii bullbulltI bull
bull rt- f1 n-~ ~ I i n -]
G f4-m fltMFT um ~lil lt~r if~U41 1~J-- i4~))if i-~ flfW-lIO ftjrltfgt 24GfliJ 0 IrJ ~~ ~~f( l1GI1 ltJi tnl ~ I
7 ~IfT ltliT fniJittTIU -(Hi if r11U 61 lLlJ f)nH ii1~1J JI~~rn -~~j~ I -g1 ltojflF[ ur -Jh 1 1it ~ h I ~
ol-t fl( q Ir ~ middot 0 ~
J~)() tmfuPTI ~ IlJ1Ill1U 6- ll middot(l
~ll ~t~IrIffi~~---- -gt --0 ~ ~~ - ~- ~~~-lt-~ -~ ~
n middot -r-~- i--
- ~ (-ill~ 1~~r gt-) (~ ~ ~
middotlfli~ iI~
fd mfllHmiddotlipli11 ~ n~ 1S1ml ~Gl1Jmiddot 4
l-fImiddottvHrd L ) t ~ gt11 I ~I ~i ~~ltirfl 1iOf-~ ampwr -~I I ~ ~ lo-~ r yC- ~
1( ~ ~ ~
~~ a~ r
bull ~
I tJltt-J Iic ~ l~~J 12L13 12 ~Lk Lmiddot I+i Iii 6 ~bt( ~LI
lt ~~h 1middot~middot_b~ - y~
~
I lJ~lt IncPJtl ltJ~ ill ~(~~) R-c2f-rJVr I ~1~1J~ ~Ih l-lLI1hll middotb~)llJC~1pound2 cl~~~ CD ~middotlgtJl) ~till (pound)
I ~~-ltd~~JLllLUC ~tt~poundQ(tl8bullil)JJl1-l812 tamplt (Z) 1~middotJJLlJthJ~~tmiddotJtllt~~~f-I=CII~ lJ~JitBh~ (~)
- ~t(JI(jK
JLlttlD ~ll~I~~1 ~~ln i2~u
middotL~~llci middot J~(JiILlt
~1~Hc ll0
(12 ~~Lt lSb ~I)_ middot 1
I (
I ~ h)Jdl~ JlllIg Ilyen~~t lj ~ Jc~19-h ~ ltlpll~ ~
tlJJ~ltQ ~~J ~~ ~S pound6S89 tD~f2 ~Q-tilliP~l5-JJ) ~cQ JJJf-iJll ~Li llii2
I ~0~l~tillt ~-hl kPJL lltJli)Jll~ ~ ~ 7-l1 l-~
Hg~ Qhlh
RJ~t1t ~jJJlil ~l0
C~U~~~) ~~~ LJ K ~
toozm J-wJvt1-~hlt~ii~-middotihb)ik~
LtlJt~t HJ~ lJ-lh l2t-th 1~JjlrTl~li mh
-----_- q -=- bull-~- -
-)l~i ~~ middotf bull bull bull ~ J ~_ _ _ __ bull bull
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
The present revised estimate of flood control scheme has been examined in GFCC and finalized for Rs 2069 crore with BC ratio as 509 The State Finance Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-VIII) Commissioner (Ganga) advised the Govt of Uttarakhand to send scheme-wise budget allocation for project in question
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that the project should be completed by March 2012 positively and no further costtime revision would be considered by the Committee
12 Scheme for Desilting of river Ichamati along the common Border portion for better drainage and flood management (Flood Control) West Bengal
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposal The proposal is a flood control scheme to benefit population of 984 lakhs and to provide protection of 225 sq km area The proposal envisages
a) Desilting of river Ichamati by means of suitable floating type excavator mounted on pontoon (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 15 28000 cum)
b) Desilting of river Ichamati by manual labour within clmr land and depositing the excavated earth at suitable distance (Total quantity of excavated material is estimated to be 139000 cum)
c) Total length of excavationdesilting is 20415 km
GFCC has finalized the cost of the project for Rs 3823 crore with BC ratio as 637 The State Finance Concurrence has been received (copy enclosed as Annexure-IX)
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with Vote of thanks to the Chair
9
Annexure-l 10sth Meeting of Advisory Committee
bull LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
fVembers of the Committee
SI ShriMrs 1 UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair 2 Allanya Ray Financial Advisor Ministry of Water Resources Member 3 Avinash Misbra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Planning Member
Commission) 4 Saidul Haq Hydrologist ( Representing Chairh1an CGWB) Member 5 JSBawa Director (HPampI) CEA (Representing Centra Electricity Member
Authority) () S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO cwe New D~lhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees a Ministry of water Resources
7 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MoWR b) Central vVater Commission
~ R C lha Member (RM) CWC New Delhi lty Jndra Raj Member (WPampP) 10 ~ K lYOlhi Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi II S K Chaudhary Chief Engineer (FM) ewc New Delhi 12 T S Patil Chid Engineer (MCO) CWC Nagpur
deg1 3 M K Sinha Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New Delhi 14 BG Kaushik Chief Engineer (PPO) CWC New Delhi 15 V K Chawla Chief Engineer (lMO) CWC New Delhi 10 Y K Sharma Chief Engineer (IBO) cwe Chandigarh 17 KN Keslui Chief Engineer (LGBO) CWC Patna 1~ G S Tyagi Director UTampSS CWC New Delhi 19 Gorakh Thakur Director CA-l CWC New Delhi 20 Ajay KumarDirector PA (N) cwe New Delhi 2L D M Raipure Dixector Appraisal CWC Nagpur -
22 P C ]ha Director PA-C CWC New Delhi middot -lt
4-middotM middot ~ 23 R K Kanodia Director PA-S CWC New Delhi
24 M W Paunikar DD PA-N CWC New Delhi 25 B Rai DD PA-C CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC 26 AK GanjuChairman GFCC Patna 27 S Masood Husain Member (Planning) GFCC Patna
d) State Governmenofficers Bihar
28 Ajay Nayak PriRcipal Secretary WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 29 SiJsil Kumar Singh SE WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 30 P K lha Resident Engineer Govt of Bihar
Chattisgarh 31 B K Rai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur 32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
middot33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur 34 BK Pndey AE Bilaspur
Chattisgarh
3~~~ BKRai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur
32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur
34 B K Pndey A E Bilaspur
Madhya Pradesh F
35 KN Agarwal Member Engineering NVDA Bhopal ~ KC Chauhan Chief Engineer Lower Narmada Projects Indore 37 OPJadhau Chief Engineer Rani Awauli Baisugar Project Bayi Hills
Jabalpur 38 PN Sharma Executive Engineer Man Project Division
Maharashtra
39 HK Tonpe Chief Engineer Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 40 VR Bhure SE Jalgaon Irrigation Project Jalgaon 41 CS Modak ED Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 42 SN Patil Executive Engineer Jalgaon
Orissa
43 DK Das Additional Secretary WRD Govt of Orissa Bhubaneswar
M Harish ChBehera Engineer-in-Chief Water Resources Bhubaneswar
45 Chakradhar Mohnta CEampBM Brahmani Lfet Basin Angul
~ Basudev Mohapatra SE Eastern Circle Cuttak
47 Gopal Krishna Behera EE OECF Divn VIBhuban
~ Subrat Das EE Jaraka Irrigation Divn Jaraka
Uttar Pradesh
49 S Ahmad Engineer-in- Chief Irrigation Deptt
50 SP Singh SE Irrigation Deptt
51 Avinash Misra AE ICD-ILalipur
52 AKNiranjan AE ICD-IIILalipur
Uattarkhand
53 Rajeev Gupta Principal Secretary Govt of Uttarakhand Dehradun
~ AK Dinker SE Irrigation Works Circle Dehradun
55 DD Dalal EE Dehradun
West Bengal
~ TK Ghosh Chief Engineer IampW Deptt Kolkata West Bengal
57 S Konar Se Greater Kolkata Drainage Circle West Bengal
~ltcl (bullbull M2~Vlimikillgal~(hi~middot7 20 j 0shy
G~t cf CihOl WjlCr tsrmiddottlrCcs j)cplitmellt
Fron Fr Aji~ i(UlH-l Sarnjya
~---
loinl S-rtlilf (ngiwcril)~)
ro Sri 0 Thkw [iii ~Itp A-~1
Centrill ~atcr ( onunissm W7 (~-rl )tli BhltlwaJl l~ K -la1f1 New D~thi
lt ~r
Prtn1 diil0d r 6 q20 10
S~Lgt S~te f jlli[tCf CQnCUlTc je for rc3lotat ion work (If Elll (t~rn G)JldHJlaquo_~ltid Systcm (MltiurKRcvi~-d) fsihar
1 Ref- Yo~~r leu no n p2TOI )middotPA(lli 14~lti) dilW tj-(c2(JO
~
Dcnr Sir I ino (11 uin(te~l (I) coves tL tiliwial CIiC1rCnc~ r~ ll 1stumt1olt ()r
q)rk of Ea5lcr~Gmi~ Caxal S)MI~nt Cv1~iol l(evis~d) Dihur coHting H3 6)4 n (W(~
~Hx Hundr()(J Eil~htyF(hl Omiddotm amp Se~mly J~i~~illakh) under rUJ Il1tkr CClltrall)~Ji
~dlHn~ ( 00 Cclrl~ A ~~str~
Co)Pf )f prxc~(~3 Jf FlHpoc~rd Ccrlfllj~e (iS1 Srbcme) OOVrtlJI1(J)( or 13 Uli1 i~ Cl1(ued for rjity rcI~ltlle $
Th~a ~ [0] )0) ~ llG ironnniol1 ar l nm ~~fll ~ctir)1
En()IIr A alxmiddotyc
i
~ rr
j L0-shy
XOW3 failltfui ly te~ ~~~ --P A---i-~r- --( shyV V ~ ~TI ~
(Ajit Kur1gtr Silhniyar) I
Joilt Se(fct~i nlbii-~e(e)
I
J i ~ middot kl If middot shy~ ~ I
( ~ 4- bull bull
~
~ ~ ( J
~~ 1 1
I
middotr ti bull~ 0 middot [
~~~~~
~ ~ tmiddot
amp
) t i
rI
i k ~~ ~
r ~_ r~ It- ~ -r ~ --~oolt_ _ bull _ ll 1 -- ~ ~- a U -nT
n)~~ ~ ~ lmiddot bull ( I 1 it toO l i 1
I bullbullbullfy ( -1 ~- A1J ~ 1 ) ~ ~~ If ~ A I J ~
~ ~~ i j ~ t ] ~ t -+J
Jro)lllt ti tTl bull - 4 li 1 ~ J
lICT cf~InN l1nlf1r ~imp~
~Jl ir)~llr ft1P_~ T~r~
ifgtLJi ltP If 3) V Tr-(J_I) 1 ~1--21 oon ~rt1~~rr11rltLI 00 2010 )In
~Q ~f1lQm
r14l middot~I ~rz MI ~mu~~ lnf[lf middot)~Q~IttJ~ (poundPc)
[q7~- t~QTm11 Itl~ f ftllmr~r~I~(i3q)cr~qt tPl tlt~~r i6fnIlT I$~~i lrmfl ~ Rlf~lr ~ji~ill~~II (iIll q~l ~l~~m u~IW61~ ~4li~hJ I
~~t- ~~ ~r~r qjq~ w~5li 1 ~t-O21J0(l ~cI~[lF $liqj 1fUl02010 --0(J--gt bull
~Vlaquo mmf 1~~r31Jgt f~) til 1~irHlU~ ~il~rltillli~~fr qiT lifiiTJ J1lt1~ ltt tV3( W1rltlr W RfF~~fT ti iffit~r Qi11l ~ ~ 1fJ1 V (fj~)~ (i 1ifl ~ ~~ r
~l 71Rt T1T~) tt WTWj(f) $1 ~~ltr~tITtra J~II~(l ~netT ftT ~r H wrr ~m f1 fir ~16-rr r ~ -rRfgt -i~it r~ ~1 Ii1~jii 11 middotR1~rtr mn Glom ltmr~1 lt~ T~rl ~~ -xi) 2252
iil~ r~ -ltltir-- qrlt em i11tft1 qtllr 3Ii I1~r -iI middot~tmx 1tVn tj~r AlfJP l~ 3i~h1 r
~~ r-~ KI ~rFl qA ~lImiddoti-eltl r~1 in0- iv~ III i gt
t~
2 1iWf-n ~t 0300 (~h$rlt Ulfit1 ~q 7500 ~IH1r T~l i~il 15eOJ t-qtm ~rl 14 ~nf1Hltm ftjqr~ ~HlTfltlTI t I ~ middotf
ltflit tmlrT f~llllqQ j1 m~~l ~~ODI) 10 ~~ ~i P)~ ojlt ~(li) ~ 3(~) tfJ
Jfjlaquor tllWiI ltP) n~~~T tlIltpfn ~ WIf ~q ~irif ~r-~~(~ J~~IO~Qjil1011 ifil ~l ~1 tll) q(rn flTljlif ilipf ~rr~lT filj([ 3Jri IfltH mr4 lfll~ middotltlVImiddot l rt1j~1 TllJfll u)jlJOrm WfTUf-tl-f ~nt1q q~ ftrrr ~Jll~1 I - ~~i~
It ~rJnun- rlgt~ll IIE-IT Illllr - - (~ Ff - lorTI r 1lll-r lIT lt1-tT l IIIt)f II ~il~ IQC1(middot tli iYJ ctmiddot 11~ -- OJ J ~~~ middot~ I1 r )i
4Tfucq -t r~ trqri ~H ~~(i~lr xd (ll r 7iicjllf(oJl cltH 3rtii~ ~mur ri ~~ frml-r 111ci~1IRtji ~iTn ~UTfj~~~~ flq~i lUr 1IM-T6 I rr
u rhmiddot~rirr qj[ r-lt~iyenil~ 11( 1 -Wu-v ~~~1Jtmiddot~OO lr(~ Qf~~F~rll (Gn~IJFH) cii bullbulltI bull
bull rt- f1 n-~ ~ I i n -]
G f4-m fltMFT um ~lil lt~r if~U41 1~J-- i4~))if i-~ flfW-lIO ftjrltfgt 24GfliJ 0 IrJ ~~ ~~f( l1GI1 ltJi tnl ~ I
7 ~IfT ltliT fniJittTIU -(Hi if r11U 61 lLlJ f)nH ii1~1J JI~~rn -~~j~ I -g1 ltojflF[ ur -Jh 1 1it ~ h I ~
ol-t fl( q Ir ~ middot 0 ~
J~)() tmfuPTI ~ IlJ1Ill1U 6- ll middot(l
~ll ~t~IrIffi~~---- -gt --0 ~ ~~ - ~- ~~~-lt-~ -~ ~
n middot -r-~- i--
- ~ (-ill~ 1~~r gt-) (~ ~ ~
middotlfli~ iI~
fd mfllHmiddotlipli11 ~ n~ 1S1ml ~Gl1Jmiddot 4
l-fImiddottvHrd L ) t ~ gt11 I ~I ~i ~~ltirfl 1iOf-~ ampwr -~I I ~ ~ lo-~ r yC- ~
1( ~ ~ ~
~~ a~ r
bull ~
I tJltt-J Iic ~ l~~J 12L13 12 ~Lk Lmiddot I+i Iii 6 ~bt( ~LI
lt ~~h 1middot~middot_b~ - y~
~
I lJ~lt IncPJtl ltJ~ ill ~(~~) R-c2f-rJVr I ~1~1J~ ~Ih l-lLI1hll middotb~)llJC~1pound2 cl~~~ CD ~middotlgtJl) ~till (pound)
I ~~-ltd~~JLllLUC ~tt~poundQ(tl8bullil)JJl1-l812 tamplt (Z) 1~middotJJLlJthJ~~tmiddotJtllt~~~f-I=CII~ lJ~JitBh~ (~)
- ~t(JI(jK
JLlttlD ~ll~I~~1 ~~ln i2~u
middotL~~llci middot J~(JiILlt
~1~Hc ll0
(12 ~~Lt lSb ~I)_ middot 1
I (
I ~ h)Jdl~ JlllIg Ilyen~~t lj ~ Jc~19-h ~ ltlpll~ ~
tlJJ~ltQ ~~J ~~ ~S pound6S89 tD~f2 ~Q-tilliP~l5-JJ) ~cQ JJJf-iJll ~Li llii2
I ~0~l~tillt ~-hl kPJL lltJli)Jll~ ~ ~ 7-l1 l-~
Hg~ Qhlh
RJ~t1t ~jJJlil ~l0
C~U~~~) ~~~ LJ K ~
toozm J-wJvt1-~hlt~ii~-middotihb)ik~
LtlJt~t HJ~ lJ-lh l2t-th 1~JjlrTl~li mh
-----_- q -=- bull-~- -
-)l~i ~~ middotf bull bull bull ~ J ~_ _ _ __ bull bull
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
Annexure-l 10sth Meeting of Advisory Committee
bull LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
fVembers of the Committee
SI ShriMrs 1 UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair 2 Allanya Ray Financial Advisor Ministry of Water Resources Member 3 Avinash Misbra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Planning Member
Commission) 4 Saidul Haq Hydrologist ( Representing Chairh1an CGWB) Member 5 JSBawa Director (HPampI) CEA (Representing Centra Electricity Member
Authority) () S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO cwe New D~lhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees a Ministry of water Resources
7 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MoWR b) Central vVater Commission
~ R C lha Member (RM) CWC New Delhi lty Jndra Raj Member (WPampP) 10 ~ K lYOlhi Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi II S K Chaudhary Chief Engineer (FM) ewc New Delhi 12 T S Patil Chid Engineer (MCO) CWC Nagpur
deg1 3 M K Sinha Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New Delhi 14 BG Kaushik Chief Engineer (PPO) CWC New Delhi 15 V K Chawla Chief Engineer (lMO) CWC New Delhi 10 Y K Sharma Chief Engineer (IBO) cwe Chandigarh 17 KN Keslui Chief Engineer (LGBO) CWC Patna 1~ G S Tyagi Director UTampSS CWC New Delhi 19 Gorakh Thakur Director CA-l CWC New Delhi 20 Ajay KumarDirector PA (N) cwe New Delhi 2L D M Raipure Dixector Appraisal CWC Nagpur -
22 P C ]ha Director PA-C CWC New Delhi middot -lt
4-middotM middot ~ 23 R K Kanodia Director PA-S CWC New Delhi
24 M W Paunikar DD PA-N CWC New Delhi 25 B Rai DD PA-C CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC 26 AK GanjuChairman GFCC Patna 27 S Masood Husain Member (Planning) GFCC Patna
d) State Governmenofficers Bihar
28 Ajay Nayak PriRcipal Secretary WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 29 SiJsil Kumar Singh SE WRD Govt of Bihar Patna 30 P K lha Resident Engineer Govt of Bihar
Chattisgarh 31 B K Rai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur 32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
middot33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur 34 BK Pndey AE Bilaspur
Chattisgarh
3~~~ BKRai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur
32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur
34 B K Pndey A E Bilaspur
Madhya Pradesh F
35 KN Agarwal Member Engineering NVDA Bhopal ~ KC Chauhan Chief Engineer Lower Narmada Projects Indore 37 OPJadhau Chief Engineer Rani Awauli Baisugar Project Bayi Hills
Jabalpur 38 PN Sharma Executive Engineer Man Project Division
Maharashtra
39 HK Tonpe Chief Engineer Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 40 VR Bhure SE Jalgaon Irrigation Project Jalgaon 41 CS Modak ED Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 42 SN Patil Executive Engineer Jalgaon
Orissa
43 DK Das Additional Secretary WRD Govt of Orissa Bhubaneswar
M Harish ChBehera Engineer-in-Chief Water Resources Bhubaneswar
45 Chakradhar Mohnta CEampBM Brahmani Lfet Basin Angul
~ Basudev Mohapatra SE Eastern Circle Cuttak
47 Gopal Krishna Behera EE OECF Divn VIBhuban
~ Subrat Das EE Jaraka Irrigation Divn Jaraka
Uttar Pradesh
49 S Ahmad Engineer-in- Chief Irrigation Deptt
50 SP Singh SE Irrigation Deptt
51 Avinash Misra AE ICD-ILalipur
52 AKNiranjan AE ICD-IIILalipur
Uattarkhand
53 Rajeev Gupta Principal Secretary Govt of Uttarakhand Dehradun
~ AK Dinker SE Irrigation Works Circle Dehradun
55 DD Dalal EE Dehradun
West Bengal
~ TK Ghosh Chief Engineer IampW Deptt Kolkata West Bengal
57 S Konar Se Greater Kolkata Drainage Circle West Bengal
~ltcl (bullbull M2~Vlimikillgal~(hi~middot7 20 j 0shy
G~t cf CihOl WjlCr tsrmiddottlrCcs j)cplitmellt
Fron Fr Aji~ i(UlH-l Sarnjya
~---
loinl S-rtlilf (ngiwcril)~)
ro Sri 0 Thkw [iii ~Itp A-~1
Centrill ~atcr ( onunissm W7 (~-rl )tli BhltlwaJl l~ K -la1f1 New D~thi
lt ~r
Prtn1 diil0d r 6 q20 10
S~Lgt S~te f jlli[tCf CQnCUlTc je for rc3lotat ion work (If Elll (t~rn G)JldHJlaquo_~ltid Systcm (MltiurKRcvi~-d) fsihar
1 Ref- Yo~~r leu no n p2TOI )middotPA(lli 14~lti) dilW tj-(c2(JO
~
Dcnr Sir I ino (11 uin(te~l (I) coves tL tiliwial CIiC1rCnc~ r~ ll 1stumt1olt ()r
q)rk of Ea5lcr~Gmi~ Caxal S)MI~nt Cv1~iol l(evis~d) Dihur coHting H3 6)4 n (W(~
~Hx Hundr()(J Eil~htyF(hl Omiddotm amp Se~mly J~i~~illakh) under rUJ Il1tkr CClltrall)~Ji
~dlHn~ ( 00 Cclrl~ A ~~str~
Co)Pf )f prxc~(~3 Jf FlHpoc~rd Ccrlfllj~e (iS1 Srbcme) OOVrtlJI1(J)( or 13 Uli1 i~ Cl1(ued for rjity rcI~ltlle $
Th~a ~ [0] )0) ~ llG ironnniol1 ar l nm ~~fll ~ctir)1
En()IIr A alxmiddotyc
i
~ rr
j L0-shy
XOW3 failltfui ly te~ ~~~ --P A---i-~r- --( shyV V ~ ~TI ~
(Ajit Kur1gtr Silhniyar) I
Joilt Se(fct~i nlbii-~e(e)
I
J i ~ middot kl If middot shy~ ~ I
( ~ 4- bull bull
~
~ ~ ( J
~~ 1 1
I
middotr ti bull~ 0 middot [
~~~~~
~ ~ tmiddot
amp
) t i
rI
i k ~~ ~
r ~_ r~ It- ~ -r ~ --~oolt_ _ bull _ ll 1 -- ~ ~- a U -nT
n)~~ ~ ~ lmiddot bull ( I 1 it toO l i 1
I bullbullbullfy ( -1 ~- A1J ~ 1 ) ~ ~~ If ~ A I J ~
~ ~~ i j ~ t ] ~ t -+J
Jro)lllt ti tTl bull - 4 li 1 ~ J
lICT cf~InN l1nlf1r ~imp~
~Jl ir)~llr ft1P_~ T~r~
ifgtLJi ltP If 3) V Tr-(J_I) 1 ~1--21 oon ~rt1~~rr11rltLI 00 2010 )In
~Q ~f1lQm
r14l middot~I ~rz MI ~mu~~ lnf[lf middot)~Q~IttJ~ (poundPc)
[q7~- t~QTm11 Itl~ f ftllmr~r~I~(i3q)cr~qt tPl tlt~~r i6fnIlT I$~~i lrmfl ~ Rlf~lr ~ji~ill~~II (iIll q~l ~l~~m u~IW61~ ~4li~hJ I
~~t- ~~ ~r~r qjq~ w~5li 1 ~t-O21J0(l ~cI~[lF $liqj 1fUl02010 --0(J--gt bull
~Vlaquo mmf 1~~r31Jgt f~) til 1~irHlU~ ~il~rltillli~~fr qiT lifiiTJ J1lt1~ ltt tV3( W1rltlr W RfF~~fT ti iffit~r Qi11l ~ ~ 1fJ1 V (fj~)~ (i 1ifl ~ ~~ r
~l 71Rt T1T~) tt WTWj(f) $1 ~~ltr~tITtra J~II~(l ~netT ftT ~r H wrr ~m f1 fir ~16-rr r ~ -rRfgt -i~it r~ ~1 Ii1~jii 11 middotR1~rtr mn Glom ltmr~1 lt~ T~rl ~~ -xi) 2252
iil~ r~ -ltltir-- qrlt em i11tft1 qtllr 3Ii I1~r -iI middot~tmx 1tVn tj~r AlfJP l~ 3i~h1 r
~~ r-~ KI ~rFl qA ~lImiddoti-eltl r~1 in0- iv~ III i gt
t~
2 1iWf-n ~t 0300 (~h$rlt Ulfit1 ~q 7500 ~IH1r T~l i~il 15eOJ t-qtm ~rl 14 ~nf1Hltm ftjqr~ ~HlTfltlTI t I ~ middotf
ltflit tmlrT f~llllqQ j1 m~~l ~~ODI) 10 ~~ ~i P)~ ojlt ~(li) ~ 3(~) tfJ
Jfjlaquor tllWiI ltP) n~~~T tlIltpfn ~ WIf ~q ~irif ~r-~~(~ J~~IO~Qjil1011 ifil ~l ~1 tll) q(rn flTljlif ilipf ~rr~lT filj([ 3Jri IfltH mr4 lfll~ middotltlVImiddot l rt1j~1 TllJfll u)jlJOrm WfTUf-tl-f ~nt1q q~ ftrrr ~Jll~1 I - ~~i~
It ~rJnun- rlgt~ll IIE-IT Illllr - - (~ Ff - lorTI r 1lll-r lIT lt1-tT l IIIt)f II ~il~ IQC1(middot tli iYJ ctmiddot 11~ -- OJ J ~~~ middot~ I1 r )i
4Tfucq -t r~ trqri ~H ~~(i~lr xd (ll r 7iicjllf(oJl cltH 3rtii~ ~mur ri ~~ frml-r 111ci~1IRtji ~iTn ~UTfj~~~~ flq~i lUr 1IM-T6 I rr
u rhmiddot~rirr qj[ r-lt~iyenil~ 11( 1 -Wu-v ~~~1Jtmiddot~OO lr(~ Qf~~F~rll (Gn~IJFH) cii bullbulltI bull
bull rt- f1 n-~ ~ I i n -]
G f4-m fltMFT um ~lil lt~r if~U41 1~J-- i4~))if i-~ flfW-lIO ftjrltfgt 24GfliJ 0 IrJ ~~ ~~f( l1GI1 ltJi tnl ~ I
7 ~IfT ltliT fniJittTIU -(Hi if r11U 61 lLlJ f)nH ii1~1J JI~~rn -~~j~ I -g1 ltojflF[ ur -Jh 1 1it ~ h I ~
ol-t fl( q Ir ~ middot 0 ~
J~)() tmfuPTI ~ IlJ1Ill1U 6- ll middot(l
~ll ~t~IrIffi~~---- -gt --0 ~ ~~ - ~- ~~~-lt-~ -~ ~
n middot -r-~- i--
- ~ (-ill~ 1~~r gt-) (~ ~ ~
middotlfli~ iI~
fd mfllHmiddotlipli11 ~ n~ 1S1ml ~Gl1Jmiddot 4
l-fImiddottvHrd L ) t ~ gt11 I ~I ~i ~~ltirfl 1iOf-~ ampwr -~I I ~ ~ lo-~ r yC- ~
1( ~ ~ ~
~~ a~ r
bull ~
I tJltt-J Iic ~ l~~J 12L13 12 ~Lk Lmiddot I+i Iii 6 ~bt( ~LI
lt ~~h 1middot~middot_b~ - y~
~
I lJ~lt IncPJtl ltJ~ ill ~(~~) R-c2f-rJVr I ~1~1J~ ~Ih l-lLI1hll middotb~)llJC~1pound2 cl~~~ CD ~middotlgtJl) ~till (pound)
I ~~-ltd~~JLllLUC ~tt~poundQ(tl8bullil)JJl1-l812 tamplt (Z) 1~middotJJLlJthJ~~tmiddotJtllt~~~f-I=CII~ lJ~JitBh~ (~)
- ~t(JI(jK
JLlttlD ~ll~I~~1 ~~ln i2~u
middotL~~llci middot J~(JiILlt
~1~Hc ll0
(12 ~~Lt lSb ~I)_ middot 1
I (
I ~ h)Jdl~ JlllIg Ilyen~~t lj ~ Jc~19-h ~ ltlpll~ ~
tlJJ~ltQ ~~J ~~ ~S pound6S89 tD~f2 ~Q-tilliP~l5-JJ) ~cQ JJJf-iJll ~Li llii2
I ~0~l~tillt ~-hl kPJL lltJli)Jll~ ~ ~ 7-l1 l-~
Hg~ Qhlh
RJ~t1t ~jJJlil ~l0
C~U~~~) ~~~ LJ K ~
toozm J-wJvt1-~hlt~ii~-middotihb)ik~
LtlJt~t HJ~ lJ-lh l2t-th 1~JjlrTl~li mh
-----_- q -=- bull-~- -
-)l~i ~~ middotf bull bull bull ~ J ~_ _ _ __ bull bull
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
Chattisgarh
3~~~ BKRai Chief Engineer Hasdeo Basin Bilaspur
32 Alok Agarwal EE Kharung W R Divn Bilaspur
33 SK Saraf SDO Kh WR Divn Bilaspur
34 B K Pndey A E Bilaspur
Madhya Pradesh F
35 KN Agarwal Member Engineering NVDA Bhopal ~ KC Chauhan Chief Engineer Lower Narmada Projects Indore 37 OPJadhau Chief Engineer Rani Awauli Baisugar Project Bayi Hills
Jabalpur 38 PN Sharma Executive Engineer Man Project Division
Maharashtra
39 HK Tonpe Chief Engineer Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 40 VR Bhure SE Jalgaon Irrigation Project Jalgaon 41 CS Modak ED Tapi Irrigation Dev Corporation Jalgaon 42 SN Patil Executive Engineer Jalgaon
Orissa
43 DK Das Additional Secretary WRD Govt of Orissa Bhubaneswar
M Harish ChBehera Engineer-in-Chief Water Resources Bhubaneswar
45 Chakradhar Mohnta CEampBM Brahmani Lfet Basin Angul
~ Basudev Mohapatra SE Eastern Circle Cuttak
47 Gopal Krishna Behera EE OECF Divn VIBhuban
~ Subrat Das EE Jaraka Irrigation Divn Jaraka
Uttar Pradesh
49 S Ahmad Engineer-in- Chief Irrigation Deptt
50 SP Singh SE Irrigation Deptt
51 Avinash Misra AE ICD-ILalipur
52 AKNiranjan AE ICD-IIILalipur
Uattarkhand
53 Rajeev Gupta Principal Secretary Govt of Uttarakhand Dehradun
~ AK Dinker SE Irrigation Works Circle Dehradun
55 DD Dalal EE Dehradun
West Bengal
~ TK Ghosh Chief Engineer IampW Deptt Kolkata West Bengal
57 S Konar Se Greater Kolkata Drainage Circle West Bengal
~ltcl (bullbull M2~Vlimikillgal~(hi~middot7 20 j 0shy
G~t cf CihOl WjlCr tsrmiddottlrCcs j)cplitmellt
Fron Fr Aji~ i(UlH-l Sarnjya
~---
loinl S-rtlilf (ngiwcril)~)
ro Sri 0 Thkw [iii ~Itp A-~1
Centrill ~atcr ( onunissm W7 (~-rl )tli BhltlwaJl l~ K -la1f1 New D~thi
lt ~r
Prtn1 diil0d r 6 q20 10
S~Lgt S~te f jlli[tCf CQnCUlTc je for rc3lotat ion work (If Elll (t~rn G)JldHJlaquo_~ltid Systcm (MltiurKRcvi~-d) fsihar
1 Ref- Yo~~r leu no n p2TOI )middotPA(lli 14~lti) dilW tj-(c2(JO
~
Dcnr Sir I ino (11 uin(te~l (I) coves tL tiliwial CIiC1rCnc~ r~ ll 1stumt1olt ()r
q)rk of Ea5lcr~Gmi~ Caxal S)MI~nt Cv1~iol l(evis~d) Dihur coHting H3 6)4 n (W(~
~Hx Hundr()(J Eil~htyF(hl Omiddotm amp Se~mly J~i~~illakh) under rUJ Il1tkr CClltrall)~Ji
~dlHn~ ( 00 Cclrl~ A ~~str~
Co)Pf )f prxc~(~3 Jf FlHpoc~rd Ccrlfllj~e (iS1 Srbcme) OOVrtlJI1(J)( or 13 Uli1 i~ Cl1(ued for rjity rcI~ltlle $
Th~a ~ [0] )0) ~ llG ironnniol1 ar l nm ~~fll ~ctir)1
En()IIr A alxmiddotyc
i
~ rr
j L0-shy
XOW3 failltfui ly te~ ~~~ --P A---i-~r- --( shyV V ~ ~TI ~
(Ajit Kur1gtr Silhniyar) I
Joilt Se(fct~i nlbii-~e(e)
I
J i ~ middot kl If middot shy~ ~ I
( ~ 4- bull bull
~
~ ~ ( J
~~ 1 1
I
middotr ti bull~ 0 middot [
~~~~~
~ ~ tmiddot
amp
) t i
rI
i k ~~ ~
r ~_ r~ It- ~ -r ~ --~oolt_ _ bull _ ll 1 -- ~ ~- a U -nT
n)~~ ~ ~ lmiddot bull ( I 1 it toO l i 1
I bullbullbullfy ( -1 ~- A1J ~ 1 ) ~ ~~ If ~ A I J ~
~ ~~ i j ~ t ] ~ t -+J
Jro)lllt ti tTl bull - 4 li 1 ~ J
lICT cf~InN l1nlf1r ~imp~
~Jl ir)~llr ft1P_~ T~r~
ifgtLJi ltP If 3) V Tr-(J_I) 1 ~1--21 oon ~rt1~~rr11rltLI 00 2010 )In
~Q ~f1lQm
r14l middot~I ~rz MI ~mu~~ lnf[lf middot)~Q~IttJ~ (poundPc)
[q7~- t~QTm11 Itl~ f ftllmr~r~I~(i3q)cr~qt tPl tlt~~r i6fnIlT I$~~i lrmfl ~ Rlf~lr ~ji~ill~~II (iIll q~l ~l~~m u~IW61~ ~4li~hJ I
~~t- ~~ ~r~r qjq~ w~5li 1 ~t-O21J0(l ~cI~[lF $liqj 1fUl02010 --0(J--gt bull
~Vlaquo mmf 1~~r31Jgt f~) til 1~irHlU~ ~il~rltillli~~fr qiT lifiiTJ J1lt1~ ltt tV3( W1rltlr W RfF~~fT ti iffit~r Qi11l ~ ~ 1fJ1 V (fj~)~ (i 1ifl ~ ~~ r
~l 71Rt T1T~) tt WTWj(f) $1 ~~ltr~tITtra J~II~(l ~netT ftT ~r H wrr ~m f1 fir ~16-rr r ~ -rRfgt -i~it r~ ~1 Ii1~jii 11 middotR1~rtr mn Glom ltmr~1 lt~ T~rl ~~ -xi) 2252
iil~ r~ -ltltir-- qrlt em i11tft1 qtllr 3Ii I1~r -iI middot~tmx 1tVn tj~r AlfJP l~ 3i~h1 r
~~ r-~ KI ~rFl qA ~lImiddoti-eltl r~1 in0- iv~ III i gt
t~
2 1iWf-n ~t 0300 (~h$rlt Ulfit1 ~q 7500 ~IH1r T~l i~il 15eOJ t-qtm ~rl 14 ~nf1Hltm ftjqr~ ~HlTfltlTI t I ~ middotf
ltflit tmlrT f~llllqQ j1 m~~l ~~ODI) 10 ~~ ~i P)~ ojlt ~(li) ~ 3(~) tfJ
Jfjlaquor tllWiI ltP) n~~~T tlIltpfn ~ WIf ~q ~irif ~r-~~(~ J~~IO~Qjil1011 ifil ~l ~1 tll) q(rn flTljlif ilipf ~rr~lT filj([ 3Jri IfltH mr4 lfll~ middotltlVImiddot l rt1j~1 TllJfll u)jlJOrm WfTUf-tl-f ~nt1q q~ ftrrr ~Jll~1 I - ~~i~
It ~rJnun- rlgt~ll IIE-IT Illllr - - (~ Ff - lorTI r 1lll-r lIT lt1-tT l IIIt)f II ~il~ IQC1(middot tli iYJ ctmiddot 11~ -- OJ J ~~~ middot~ I1 r )i
4Tfucq -t r~ trqri ~H ~~(i~lr xd (ll r 7iicjllf(oJl cltH 3rtii~ ~mur ri ~~ frml-r 111ci~1IRtji ~iTn ~UTfj~~~~ flq~i lUr 1IM-T6 I rr
u rhmiddot~rirr qj[ r-lt~iyenil~ 11( 1 -Wu-v ~~~1Jtmiddot~OO lr(~ Qf~~F~rll (Gn~IJFH) cii bullbulltI bull
bull rt- f1 n-~ ~ I i n -]
G f4-m fltMFT um ~lil lt~r if~U41 1~J-- i4~))if i-~ flfW-lIO ftjrltfgt 24GfliJ 0 IrJ ~~ ~~f( l1GI1 ltJi tnl ~ I
7 ~IfT ltliT fniJittTIU -(Hi if r11U 61 lLlJ f)nH ii1~1J JI~~rn -~~j~ I -g1 ltojflF[ ur -Jh 1 1it ~ h I ~
ol-t fl( q Ir ~ middot 0 ~
J~)() tmfuPTI ~ IlJ1Ill1U 6- ll middot(l
~ll ~t~IrIffi~~---- -gt --0 ~ ~~ - ~- ~~~-lt-~ -~ ~
n middot -r-~- i--
- ~ (-ill~ 1~~r gt-) (~ ~ ~
middotlfli~ iI~
fd mfllHmiddotlipli11 ~ n~ 1S1ml ~Gl1Jmiddot 4
l-fImiddottvHrd L ) t ~ gt11 I ~I ~i ~~ltirfl 1iOf-~ ampwr -~I I ~ ~ lo-~ r yC- ~
1( ~ ~ ~
~~ a~ r
bull ~
I tJltt-J Iic ~ l~~J 12L13 12 ~Lk Lmiddot I+i Iii 6 ~bt( ~LI
lt ~~h 1middot~middot_b~ - y~
~
I lJ~lt IncPJtl ltJ~ ill ~(~~) R-c2f-rJVr I ~1~1J~ ~Ih l-lLI1hll middotb~)llJC~1pound2 cl~~~ CD ~middotlgtJl) ~till (pound)
I ~~-ltd~~JLllLUC ~tt~poundQ(tl8bullil)JJl1-l812 tamplt (Z) 1~middotJJLlJthJ~~tmiddotJtllt~~~f-I=CII~ lJ~JitBh~ (~)
- ~t(JI(jK
JLlttlD ~ll~I~~1 ~~ln i2~u
middotL~~llci middot J~(JiILlt
~1~Hc ll0
(12 ~~Lt lSb ~I)_ middot 1
I (
I ~ h)Jdl~ JlllIg Ilyen~~t lj ~ Jc~19-h ~ ltlpll~ ~
tlJJ~ltQ ~~J ~~ ~S pound6S89 tD~f2 ~Q-tilliP~l5-JJ) ~cQ JJJf-iJll ~Li llii2
I ~0~l~tillt ~-hl kPJL lltJli)Jll~ ~ ~ 7-l1 l-~
Hg~ Qhlh
RJ~t1t ~jJJlil ~l0
C~U~~~) ~~~ LJ K ~
toozm J-wJvt1-~hlt~ii~-middotihb)ik~
LtlJt~t HJ~ lJ-lh l2t-th 1~JjlrTl~li mh
-----_- q -=- bull-~- -
-)l~i ~~ middotf bull bull bull ~ J ~_ _ _ __ bull bull
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
~ltcl (bullbull M2~Vlimikillgal~(hi~middot7 20 j 0shy
G~t cf CihOl WjlCr tsrmiddottlrCcs j)cplitmellt
Fron Fr Aji~ i(UlH-l Sarnjya
~---
loinl S-rtlilf (ngiwcril)~)
ro Sri 0 Thkw [iii ~Itp A-~1
Centrill ~atcr ( onunissm W7 (~-rl )tli BhltlwaJl l~ K -la1f1 New D~thi
lt ~r
Prtn1 diil0d r 6 q20 10
S~Lgt S~te f jlli[tCf CQnCUlTc je for rc3lotat ion work (If Elll (t~rn G)JldHJlaquo_~ltid Systcm (MltiurKRcvi~-d) fsihar
1 Ref- Yo~~r leu no n p2TOI )middotPA(lli 14~lti) dilW tj-(c2(JO
~
Dcnr Sir I ino (11 uin(te~l (I) coves tL tiliwial CIiC1rCnc~ r~ ll 1stumt1olt ()r
q)rk of Ea5lcr~Gmi~ Caxal S)MI~nt Cv1~iol l(evis~d) Dihur coHting H3 6)4 n (W(~
~Hx Hundr()(J Eil~htyF(hl Omiddotm amp Se~mly J~i~~illakh) under rUJ Il1tkr CClltrall)~Ji
~dlHn~ ( 00 Cclrl~ A ~~str~
Co)Pf )f prxc~(~3 Jf FlHpoc~rd Ccrlfllj~e (iS1 Srbcme) OOVrtlJI1(J)( or 13 Uli1 i~ Cl1(ued for rjity rcI~ltlle $
Th~a ~ [0] )0) ~ llG ironnniol1 ar l nm ~~fll ~ctir)1
En()IIr A alxmiddotyc
i
~ rr
j L0-shy
XOW3 failltfui ly te~ ~~~ --P A---i-~r- --( shyV V ~ ~TI ~
(Ajit Kur1gtr Silhniyar) I
Joilt Se(fct~i nlbii-~e(e)
I
J i ~ middot kl If middot shy~ ~ I
( ~ 4- bull bull
~
~ ~ ( J
~~ 1 1
I
middotr ti bull~ 0 middot [
~~~~~
~ ~ tmiddot
amp
) t i
rI
i k ~~ ~
r ~_ r~ It- ~ -r ~ --~oolt_ _ bull _ ll 1 -- ~ ~- a U -nT
n)~~ ~ ~ lmiddot bull ( I 1 it toO l i 1
I bullbullbullfy ( -1 ~- A1J ~ 1 ) ~ ~~ If ~ A I J ~
~ ~~ i j ~ t ] ~ t -+J
Jro)lllt ti tTl bull - 4 li 1 ~ J
lICT cf~InN l1nlf1r ~imp~
~Jl ir)~llr ft1P_~ T~r~
ifgtLJi ltP If 3) V Tr-(J_I) 1 ~1--21 oon ~rt1~~rr11rltLI 00 2010 )In
~Q ~f1lQm
r14l middot~I ~rz MI ~mu~~ lnf[lf middot)~Q~IttJ~ (poundPc)
[q7~- t~QTm11 Itl~ f ftllmr~r~I~(i3q)cr~qt tPl tlt~~r i6fnIlT I$~~i lrmfl ~ Rlf~lr ~ji~ill~~II (iIll q~l ~l~~m u~IW61~ ~4li~hJ I
~~t- ~~ ~r~r qjq~ w~5li 1 ~t-O21J0(l ~cI~[lF $liqj 1fUl02010 --0(J--gt bull
~Vlaquo mmf 1~~r31Jgt f~) til 1~irHlU~ ~il~rltillli~~fr qiT lifiiTJ J1lt1~ ltt tV3( W1rltlr W RfF~~fT ti iffit~r Qi11l ~ ~ 1fJ1 V (fj~)~ (i 1ifl ~ ~~ r
~l 71Rt T1T~) tt WTWj(f) $1 ~~ltr~tITtra J~II~(l ~netT ftT ~r H wrr ~m f1 fir ~16-rr r ~ -rRfgt -i~it r~ ~1 Ii1~jii 11 middotR1~rtr mn Glom ltmr~1 lt~ T~rl ~~ -xi) 2252
iil~ r~ -ltltir-- qrlt em i11tft1 qtllr 3Ii I1~r -iI middot~tmx 1tVn tj~r AlfJP l~ 3i~h1 r
~~ r-~ KI ~rFl qA ~lImiddoti-eltl r~1 in0- iv~ III i gt
t~
2 1iWf-n ~t 0300 (~h$rlt Ulfit1 ~q 7500 ~IH1r T~l i~il 15eOJ t-qtm ~rl 14 ~nf1Hltm ftjqr~ ~HlTfltlTI t I ~ middotf
ltflit tmlrT f~llllqQ j1 m~~l ~~ODI) 10 ~~ ~i P)~ ojlt ~(li) ~ 3(~) tfJ
Jfjlaquor tllWiI ltP) n~~~T tlIltpfn ~ WIf ~q ~irif ~r-~~(~ J~~IO~Qjil1011 ifil ~l ~1 tll) q(rn flTljlif ilipf ~rr~lT filj([ 3Jri IfltH mr4 lfll~ middotltlVImiddot l rt1j~1 TllJfll u)jlJOrm WfTUf-tl-f ~nt1q q~ ftrrr ~Jll~1 I - ~~i~
It ~rJnun- rlgt~ll IIE-IT Illllr - - (~ Ff - lorTI r 1lll-r lIT lt1-tT l IIIt)f II ~il~ IQC1(middot tli iYJ ctmiddot 11~ -- OJ J ~~~ middot~ I1 r )i
4Tfucq -t r~ trqri ~H ~~(i~lr xd (ll r 7iicjllf(oJl cltH 3rtii~ ~mur ri ~~ frml-r 111ci~1IRtji ~iTn ~UTfj~~~~ flq~i lUr 1IM-T6 I rr
u rhmiddot~rirr qj[ r-lt~iyenil~ 11( 1 -Wu-v ~~~1Jtmiddot~OO lr(~ Qf~~F~rll (Gn~IJFH) cii bullbulltI bull
bull rt- f1 n-~ ~ I i n -]
G f4-m fltMFT um ~lil lt~r if~U41 1~J-- i4~))if i-~ flfW-lIO ftjrltfgt 24GfliJ 0 IrJ ~~ ~~f( l1GI1 ltJi tnl ~ I
7 ~IfT ltliT fniJittTIU -(Hi if r11U 61 lLlJ f)nH ii1~1J JI~~rn -~~j~ I -g1 ltojflF[ ur -Jh 1 1it ~ h I ~
ol-t fl( q Ir ~ middot 0 ~
J~)() tmfuPTI ~ IlJ1Ill1U 6- ll middot(l
~ll ~t~IrIffi~~---- -gt --0 ~ ~~ - ~- ~~~-lt-~ -~ ~
n middot -r-~- i--
- ~ (-ill~ 1~~r gt-) (~ ~ ~
middotlfli~ iI~
fd mfllHmiddotlipli11 ~ n~ 1S1ml ~Gl1Jmiddot 4
l-fImiddottvHrd L ) t ~ gt11 I ~I ~i ~~ltirfl 1iOf-~ ampwr -~I I ~ ~ lo-~ r yC- ~
1( ~ ~ ~
~~ a~ r
bull ~
I tJltt-J Iic ~ l~~J 12L13 12 ~Lk Lmiddot I+i Iii 6 ~bt( ~LI
lt ~~h 1middot~middot_b~ - y~
~
I lJ~lt IncPJtl ltJ~ ill ~(~~) R-c2f-rJVr I ~1~1J~ ~Ih l-lLI1hll middotb~)llJC~1pound2 cl~~~ CD ~middotlgtJl) ~till (pound)
I ~~-ltd~~JLllLUC ~tt~poundQ(tl8bullil)JJl1-l812 tamplt (Z) 1~middotJJLlJthJ~~tmiddotJtllt~~~f-I=CII~ lJ~JitBh~ (~)
- ~t(JI(jK
JLlttlD ~ll~I~~1 ~~ln i2~u
middotL~~llci middot J~(JiILlt
~1~Hc ll0
(12 ~~Lt lSb ~I)_ middot 1
I (
I ~ h)Jdl~ JlllIg Ilyen~~t lj ~ Jc~19-h ~ ltlpll~ ~
tlJJ~ltQ ~~J ~~ ~S pound6S89 tD~f2 ~Q-tilliP~l5-JJ) ~cQ JJJf-iJll ~Li llii2
I ~0~l~tillt ~-hl kPJL lltJli)Jll~ ~ ~ 7-l1 l-~
Hg~ Qhlh
RJ~t1t ~jJJlil ~l0
C~U~~~) ~~~ LJ K ~
toozm J-wJvt1-~hlt~ii~-middotihb)ik~
LtlJt~t HJ~ lJ-lh l2t-th 1~JjlrTl~li mh
-----_- q -=- bull-~- -
-)l~i ~~ middotf bull bull bull ~ J ~_ _ _ __ bull bull
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
r ~_ r~ It- ~ -r ~ --~oolt_ _ bull _ ll 1 -- ~ ~- a U -nT
n)~~ ~ ~ lmiddot bull ( I 1 it toO l i 1
I bullbullbullfy ( -1 ~- A1J ~ 1 ) ~ ~~ If ~ A I J ~
~ ~~ i j ~ t ] ~ t -+J
Jro)lllt ti tTl bull - 4 li 1 ~ J
lICT cf~InN l1nlf1r ~imp~
~Jl ir)~llr ft1P_~ T~r~
ifgtLJi ltP If 3) V Tr-(J_I) 1 ~1--21 oon ~rt1~~rr11rltLI 00 2010 )In
~Q ~f1lQm
r14l middot~I ~rz MI ~mu~~ lnf[lf middot)~Q~IttJ~ (poundPc)
[q7~- t~QTm11 Itl~ f ftllmr~r~I~(i3q)cr~qt tPl tlt~~r i6fnIlT I$~~i lrmfl ~ Rlf~lr ~ji~ill~~II (iIll q~l ~l~~m u~IW61~ ~4li~hJ I
~~t- ~~ ~r~r qjq~ w~5li 1 ~t-O21J0(l ~cI~[lF $liqj 1fUl02010 --0(J--gt bull
~Vlaquo mmf 1~~r31Jgt f~) til 1~irHlU~ ~il~rltillli~~fr qiT lifiiTJ J1lt1~ ltt tV3( W1rltlr W RfF~~fT ti iffit~r Qi11l ~ ~ 1fJ1 V (fj~)~ (i 1ifl ~ ~~ r
~l 71Rt T1T~) tt WTWj(f) $1 ~~ltr~tITtra J~II~(l ~netT ftT ~r H wrr ~m f1 fir ~16-rr r ~ -rRfgt -i~it r~ ~1 Ii1~jii 11 middotR1~rtr mn Glom ltmr~1 lt~ T~rl ~~ -xi) 2252
iil~ r~ -ltltir-- qrlt em i11tft1 qtllr 3Ii I1~r -iI middot~tmx 1tVn tj~r AlfJP l~ 3i~h1 r
~~ r-~ KI ~rFl qA ~lImiddoti-eltl r~1 in0- iv~ III i gt
t~
2 1iWf-n ~t 0300 (~h$rlt Ulfit1 ~q 7500 ~IH1r T~l i~il 15eOJ t-qtm ~rl 14 ~nf1Hltm ftjqr~ ~HlTfltlTI t I ~ middotf
ltflit tmlrT f~llllqQ j1 m~~l ~~ODI) 10 ~~ ~i P)~ ojlt ~(li) ~ 3(~) tfJ
Jfjlaquor tllWiI ltP) n~~~T tlIltpfn ~ WIf ~q ~irif ~r-~~(~ J~~IO~Qjil1011 ifil ~l ~1 tll) q(rn flTljlif ilipf ~rr~lT filj([ 3Jri IfltH mr4 lfll~ middotltlVImiddot l rt1j~1 TllJfll u)jlJOrm WfTUf-tl-f ~nt1q q~ ftrrr ~Jll~1 I - ~~i~
It ~rJnun- rlgt~ll IIE-IT Illllr - - (~ Ff - lorTI r 1lll-r lIT lt1-tT l IIIt)f II ~il~ IQC1(middot tli iYJ ctmiddot 11~ -- OJ J ~~~ middot~ I1 r )i
4Tfucq -t r~ trqri ~H ~~(i~lr xd (ll r 7iicjllf(oJl cltH 3rtii~ ~mur ri ~~ frml-r 111ci~1IRtji ~iTn ~UTfj~~~~ flq~i lUr 1IM-T6 I rr
u rhmiddot~rirr qj[ r-lt~iyenil~ 11( 1 -Wu-v ~~~1Jtmiddot~OO lr(~ Qf~~F~rll (Gn~IJFH) cii bullbulltI bull
bull rt- f1 n-~ ~ I i n -]
G f4-m fltMFT um ~lil lt~r if~U41 1~J-- i4~))if i-~ flfW-lIO ftjrltfgt 24GfliJ 0 IrJ ~~ ~~f( l1GI1 ltJi tnl ~ I
7 ~IfT ltliT fniJittTIU -(Hi if r11U 61 lLlJ f)nH ii1~1J JI~~rn -~~j~ I -g1 ltojflF[ ur -Jh 1 1it ~ h I ~
ol-t fl( q Ir ~ middot 0 ~
J~)() tmfuPTI ~ IlJ1Ill1U 6- ll middot(l
~ll ~t~IrIffi~~---- -gt --0 ~ ~~ - ~- ~~~-lt-~ -~ ~
n middot -r-~- i--
- ~ (-ill~ 1~~r gt-) (~ ~ ~
middotlfli~ iI~
fd mfllHmiddotlipli11 ~ n~ 1S1ml ~Gl1Jmiddot 4
l-fImiddottvHrd L ) t ~ gt11 I ~I ~i ~~ltirfl 1iOf-~ ampwr -~I I ~ ~ lo-~ r yC- ~
1( ~ ~ ~
~~ a~ r
bull ~
I tJltt-J Iic ~ l~~J 12L13 12 ~Lk Lmiddot I+i Iii 6 ~bt( ~LI
lt ~~h 1middot~middot_b~ - y~
~
I lJ~lt IncPJtl ltJ~ ill ~(~~) R-c2f-rJVr I ~1~1J~ ~Ih l-lLI1hll middotb~)llJC~1pound2 cl~~~ CD ~middotlgtJl) ~till (pound)
I ~~-ltd~~JLllLUC ~tt~poundQ(tl8bullil)JJl1-l812 tamplt (Z) 1~middotJJLlJthJ~~tmiddotJtllt~~~f-I=CII~ lJ~JitBh~ (~)
- ~t(JI(jK
JLlttlD ~ll~I~~1 ~~ln i2~u
middotL~~llci middot J~(JiILlt
~1~Hc ll0
(12 ~~Lt lSb ~I)_ middot 1
I (
I ~ h)Jdl~ JlllIg Ilyen~~t lj ~ Jc~19-h ~ ltlpll~ ~
tlJJ~ltQ ~~J ~~ ~S pound6S89 tD~f2 ~Q-tilliP~l5-JJ) ~cQ JJJf-iJll ~Li llii2
I ~0~l~tillt ~-hl kPJL lltJli)Jll~ ~ ~ 7-l1 l-~
Hg~ Qhlh
RJ~t1t ~jJJlil ~l0
C~U~~~) ~~~ LJ K ~
toozm J-wJvt1-~hlt~ii~-middotihb)ik~
LtlJt~t HJ~ lJ-lh l2t-th 1~JjlrTl~li mh
-----_- q -=- bull-~- -
-)l~i ~~ middotf bull bull bull ~ J ~_ _ _ __ bull bull
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
bull ~
I tJltt-J Iic ~ l~~J 12L13 12 ~Lk Lmiddot I+i Iii 6 ~bt( ~LI
lt ~~h 1middot~middot_b~ - y~
~
I lJ~lt IncPJtl ltJ~ ill ~(~~) R-c2f-rJVr I ~1~1J~ ~Ih l-lLI1hll middotb~)llJC~1pound2 cl~~~ CD ~middotlgtJl) ~till (pound)
I ~~-ltd~~JLllLUC ~tt~poundQ(tl8bullil)JJl1-l812 tamplt (Z) 1~middotJJLlJthJ~~tmiddotJtllt~~~f-I=CII~ lJ~JitBh~ (~)
- ~t(JI(jK
JLlttlD ~ll~I~~1 ~~ln i2~u
middotL~~llci middot J~(JiILlt
~1~Hc ll0
(12 ~~Lt lSb ~I)_ middot 1
I (
I ~ h)Jdl~ JlllIg Ilyen~~t lj ~ Jc~19-h ~ ltlpll~ ~
tlJJ~ltQ ~~J ~~ ~S pound6S89 tD~f2 ~Q-tilliP~l5-JJ) ~cQ JJJf-iJll ~Li llii2
I ~0~l~tillt ~-hl kPJL lltJli)Jll~ ~ ~ 7-l1 l-~
Hg~ Qhlh
RJ~t1t ~jJJlil ~l0
C~U~~~) ~~~ LJ K ~
toozm J-wJvt1-~hlt~ii~-middotihb)ik~
LtlJt~t HJ~ lJ-lh l2t-th 1~JjlrTl~li mh
-----_- q -=- bull-~- -
-)l~i ~~ middotf bull bull bull ~ J ~_ _ _ __ bull bull
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
2010 1159 FROM TO 01126105 18J
shy
BY F4middot ~1sectIJLrampErI
GOVERNMENT OF OUSSA TJFPARTMENT OF WAfltn t1F~(JJRCFS
No IUrlOlO 9l1 IWR Ol1foo -~ 0
From Shri DK Das Additionnl Seer~tary to Ooverrmcnt
To Tht DIrector EA
GOVemmanl of ndia Cenlr W~p Commission Extemal ASlIisUmce Dte Room No 803(S) SeWQ BhQwtm lKuraffi New Dclhimiddot(i6 I~
G i~~
~~Sub- Rtn1 Left Bn11( CHonl of Jlaquooampall lrri~utcp Pr~~ctt Oricsa ~
(Estimated cos~ amp130409 Crore) ~ ~~ Sir
I 11m directcd to invite reference to your letter No G199-EA I 04
011 lle Wove lIubjcc l1nU lilly lhl1t Fimmco D rpl1rtmcrll OOVCrrlll1Cmt of Ori~ hn~] I~llurrcd in
the lt051 estimnte of RengaliLefi Bank Canal (RD 29117 Km tgt IlD 1470 m) al ~~145U~ Crorc A$ per 2009 Cprice vide their UOR No 3409 PSF dJeltJ 2162 Io
This is for kind informlltion auJ necesSAry ~ction I I
J
BYFo~ Memiddotrna N~o ~~7 ~ WR Dated 2 bull b I 0
Copy ((Warded to the Director CA(l) voveruner1t or ~ Co~m~sson Cos~Apprn~snl(~rrigatio~) Directornte Room No 406 A(Sgt S Poram New Delhl-l1 0066 for mformatlon and necessary action
~
c q 1 ~ A~Jltionai Sla1 ct GmiddotprtMmoNo J IIWR Doted l ) middot middoth I () CoJY forwordcd to the Finance Department for infonnAtioll
C) AlaquocHti)n ill Slaquo1 Memo No ~ 9 ~ IIWR Dated l- G I cJ
Copy forwarded to the EfC bullbull Watr Res(ur~s for infoFJn1ior ~
AlditiOlaql secretn ~f~~lllmgntgt -~ r~
- -J~r-rv-r~middotf
--_
I
j~
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
I 6 I ~I 1 ~ I I
I bull bull t I bull
I L I I I ~ I I
OiOf lLllttj ftt~~J
middot(HI(Ut4 ~)~~~i4Jb) tpitIU1t ~
4
I ~bll~fl Ryli-trl~ 1JVt4~ HP[~J iL~ t~~~ ~~llh~W -t
I ublJf i~lh JlJtl~ pb4~ ll~tJl~ lnllI1K ~--e
JL~middot CliOt hhgt~ ~(llii-~~-lbJJ)J~Jh) lll~~~ riyenft ~I~J~ -~
~ l~~~~ tf1 WHpct ~ti~wtpoundmiddot p1t~uh~ tQ Jl~l~blt ~l~i ~ - bull- middotmiddotmiddot middot7-- shy
01~O~~OliOii itJtl1 middotw
bull
~
~q MO~)OlZ L-hJt~ ~- 1$ ~lli ~~l ~du ~t~ 9trpoundi~V O~ lUtl~ Il~ffi~h
~~ )~Jflipoundhlb tJrt l~j3~ ~~ 21ID l~ ~I~ bJU(~t~ 1Q LbJJ l-Jllfhl
miH td~~ ~ fr1~Sti-b~-p-Iif) middotD~~-ti1Jlmiddot -l~middotmiddotUililJhlh--n~~Th-u1iili -~
O~i)( hl~ ~lgt1Fmiddot gtL~bj m~JDUt~OlpoundOlil -~J1 (
~~ Fl J~c~ J1Jlt JJWpound ~~ ltiJ~B~ bOllOl1
~li~
~~1i 0l10~ lJl~lJ Jp--~J
middotOl)~t~ ~~) lliliP~p1) H~~l1tf15 )iilitl
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
- ~L-- 1 _ N _ _ _ 1 )lt ~ rA_~ I 1 ~ - _ rLmiddotJ j ~ ~ ~yen ~ 4 I ~ I bull 11lf $ Ijbullbullll1 rt bull gt p bullh~Ul Imiddot ~ II V -- 4 ~ r ~ 1 ~~ l1 1bull ~~~ 1 --- ~~ ( )~~lt~~ -~
tmiddot YI middotbull1f- ( I f I ~ 1J If A- J ~ i-- bull t~ (~middot ~
C- ~ bull~ ~ jl gt1 ~ tt~11 ~ ~iI~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~
FXLURGtNT --~
GOVERNrv1ENT OF ORISSA
DEPARTMEIlT OF iVATER RESOURCES gtI~
NO~ t C~middot-U ~r_jWR Dated BhubaneswiJr tHe ~ l () c FC-J -4510
From Shri Dhiren Kumar Oas Additional Secretary lo Governm(r~
To ~ Director (LJT amp 55)
Central Water Comrllission 803 (N) Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi - 110 606
Subject Regarding State Finaf1ce Concurrence of Fio0d Pmiddototection work of Brahmani-Keurolua-Birupa Doab of Brahmdni Sys(em
Sir
I am directed Lo invite a reference to the LettEr NO8307 dated 19062010 of the Engineer-in-Chief P~annin~ u Design on the abovesubject and to say that Finance Departrrent have concurred in the cost EstirYlate of Rs62 32 aores in respect of Finance Depnrtmcnt vide lmiddottleir UOR IJOl3410rrJ SF duted
21062010
Yours t3itllfJIIY
tmiddot
-i ( Ic f
k olo~ p ~J o oJ Add~~s~cretarycil~p~r~ltr GA- Memo No - ~~vi__-JWR middot Dated L 2 0J--rJ ~
~ ~ ~~ t) COPYl forNarded to the Director Region~ lEntrcJl Water l ~ J I
j ~ Commission MahenadiBhawn Bhoi Nagar Bhubaneswar or irfqmetion and 1 ~
~necessary action I bull L
~ ~
I ~
(
-- ~ ~
~
Ii v ~
b Addl Secretory yiltje)lttn[l1ltf( C
Memo No f c ~ WR Dated L 2 - ( F-i r)) (I
Copy forwarded to the Enqinee-il-Chicf wder1 R i ~
JI Engineer-in-Chief ~ ~Dfor irFOimqtioon ~nd re~essary action ~ i
I
~dcgt-~~ ~~1-l) ~ltt ~~Y G lo I
1Ai) s sJ)~ c-w ~ )~~ I ~Cgt--f~~ ~-D C-IC C ~Pr~) 7 ~N -=-- ~ t
~~---~~~~ogt~~ Add 5rCI etary to ~eJ~~~1i II ~~ ~ -r lr-c ~ ~~~ 1(l ~ - l
- -s ~~ )-= -~--=- ~
- 1 -_Ob~ __b
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
~~ l 0fL _L 1J-=~1O-o~fM)~iiQi ~
~ 3ffiO~O cr~ ~ ~ ~
3ffiI~ mffi I ~
f1~~ICfgt (~~- II) -- shy
~mcnR
1R1 ~ riampj=jnI=61T1~
Tflnmiddot~ ft~ijdegl ~fftimf ~ cfRr-it ~ ~-3000151
fmt 3fTWT~~ fcrCl) 24 ~ 2010
~ VR1tG ~ -q ~ ~ ffr~i1 Jjlrtfmiddoth~ ~ fr~lfur Qgt~ T~1ffif mur-=rr $ ~ -q I
lTlgt1Gll middot 34X1Cffi fqtt~co Ugtll it31rPTd ~ t f$ ~ 25(162010 em ~ JR1
~ it ~ tH116Cfgt1lt tlfllfcr (Acvisory Cornmjtt~e on Inieation) $t ~4J centl~lti ~ if ~ 1000 EIk fItrffuJ ~dq) if J~TO~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~Ifmiddot~ ~ EiIampIClIRI GJltfi 11~ir r-~ ~T ((gt1 S~ti ~ qx fcr~ fctm 1iAT gtI laquo11 fq lt1 t I
34(1 ltl1vr-=rr mT ~ ffi1rti cpr ~T~ xO 2370euroO ~ ~TTfR qj -rrq=j=tlITmiddotamplr-TTT1 4213 11-2009-04 (04)04 ~ 2101 2010 GHT Tf1jl fffiP ~1Tf 3ITllPT ~ cnT ~ cBT VT ~ t I fct+IflT ampm 3ftFlil ClRTltn 7f1JT t f$ lt-I1wlT ~ TRhamshy~~ fcnlt) vrA ~ ~ 3ctHI~o-s WffR ~ fctr ~lfTl ~ ~~ t I
~ W1l it ~ y6 ~ cpr ~~ E3fi t f$ f4-XcK ~ l1~ ~fffii ~cfi ~q-q fcmr 1~f cBT ~~Rf iFlt t Tflt1[ tl ~ -g-~ ~ (l~~ f$lt) vrA cfi ~ it ~P Cf711t(iTifi ~ Clgt1 CfflC em I
1 l~ CC
--3 --~---
~ ii (~lxO~O ~) I _ 1~~l~
~ lcO~ L 11-201ltgt-04(04)2004 5fi1~q) ( lARlRlFil Pidif(jRsld ClgtT ~~ 3iTcfffcf) Cflrltlcntl g tlftm-
1
~ Gql~oe m~x -I 11ffiT mqJR ref ~llf~m -rfrn fiM ampgtlIen
f0-11 ~qt mf ~ovfi03lTO qgtI~ ~ ~~ I
2 3lT tl61It5centlx (~3fIX) ~ 3lWllT ~f PtA ~ 1Wf ~~ I 3 -s1~~CfClt (~)~ffi1 7f1n ~ PI llij 01 ~firr~ ~q ~I
middot4middot ~~~fcrrrnurlff fu~ ~ 3ffiI~U-s I
J11lfT ~
1 ~----(31RO~O ~T~)
gill)) -ffpm mr4
IlllIMroc jtWFAH 2WI()IIE~ ~ectioo WOfLJ lOlOmiddotIICSS Flood ScherntC )$ F1uod ir0leclia1 rmiddot~~ocb
I I H i
f I
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
~~~ P ~j~ q _ ~ ~ Jf ~ _ _~ _ _____~_ ~ _ ~ - ~vmiddot~~4i~ I ltf lU gt
__ - - 1( IAmiddottltJjIl~~ ~ 1 pbull lhxmiddot shy- r L I bull Jao- _ _~_ ~ __ _ ~ _~ abullbull ~ ~~ Ji~~middotrdJ - _
lIf~ middot _ f)~ -e _ D)( f~
~Ir J
~ ~ J middot i~~ t ~middotJi J ~ ( ) ~ ~J ~ bull
f~ f 4~~ t~ ~lt 4 ~ iH~( ~ t j ~
~(~~_dmiddott~ Irrgation amp Vaferway~ Departmeilt Government of West Beng~l
Jalasampau Bhovan Western Block(0 r ltl Flool1 Bidhannagar lolkata~-OO 091
N ) 13 -lfl IW I PI l-r~C~8D~-120 10 D~cd ihc 17h illltl gt010
From Shri D Sengupta Ii
Deputy Secretary to the Government of WC6t Bengal
I The Chairman Ganga Flood Control Commission Government of India Ministry of Water Resources Sinchal Bhavan 1st Floor Patna - 80CO 15
J -) I i
Sub Concurrence oj the State Finnnce I)cpariment tOUiards execution oj the Scheme Desilting oj liver IcharllCiti alonf] the coTtliwn border portion Jor better drainage and flood managemelLt ill the ~ench froln Humogtcria P S Guighata at 12000 KM (Kulkhali PS 3arsa Dist J~SS()t Bal1g[uuesfl) to the BSF bridge at Kalanchi PS Gaighatu at 1404 15 km (Challclvria
P S Sarsa Dist Jessore Bangladesh) - approximate length 20 OU c1Il (Estimated Cost Rs 3821 crare)
Sir Inviting a reference to thesubject referred Rhove IaJH dire(tcd tost8tf thafthe
Stat~ Finance Department has since concurred to the pxecutilt11 of the aJove lllellliolled scheme on consideration of incl1lsion of the SClrw under Ccp trll Sector Scheme ltu be executed under 100 Central Assistance) by way of making bUGgetalY provisions under Plan Budget in Demand No 32 as shown belamiddot
Ruclgetcu) prevision Head of Account Year nade for thE SChellle
4711-01-1Q3-CN-001-53-V 2010-11 2400 ClUre
4711-0 1-103-CN-OO 1-53-V 2011-12 1423 core Total 3823 crore
This is for favour )[ your kind infonn8lion
YOurR faithfullyy PrCN) ~
0r-1lshy ~ y O~qt) ( D Sengupta l
Deputy Secretary
No 13 -IBl(l) DRteu lhe 17 th June 2010 Copy forwarded tor informaion to
The Director amp EO Chief Engineer IampW Directorate Gbvt of West Bengal
I
( ~bull R~ p gt 1~ i ) p ~ middotclmiddot
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
-No 16272010-PA (N) i 935 - ~ y
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION
PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION 407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04102010
Sub 106th meeting middotof the Advis~ry Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 16092010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the I
above meeting held at New Delhi on 16th September 2010 at Sew a Bhawan R K Puram I
New-Belhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~~
(SK Srivastava) 0- Chief Engineer (PAO) cum
Member Secretary of the Advisory Committee
To 1
f C bull ~ Members 0 ommleett ~ cAf ~ 1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R ~jl~iram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Fihance nS~~FI6or) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Departmeht of Power 55 Bhawan-tlhd FlgorNew Delhi 4 Secretary Ministrymiddot of Environment amp Forftsts 4th FlooJ~ R6om No- 40405
Paryavaran BhawanCGQ Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 738 A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi
S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
New belhi 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning CommisSion Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan New
Delhi Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) cwe New Delhi 15 Member (RM)CWC New Delhi 16 Cbairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - SOO 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
18 lCommissioner ) Ministry Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditu Ministry Finance Lok
Bhawan j Delhi 20 Prinei I Secretary Irrigation Department ment of Punjab Secretariat
Chandigarh-160 001 2l Principal ry Irrigation rtment Government of Uttar Pradesh
lay Lueknow-226 001 (UP) Secretary Irrigation Department of Maharashtra Mantralaya Mumbai-400 032
23 Princi I ry Irrigation rtment Government of Rajasthan Secretariat Jaipur-302 005
24 Principal Irrigation amp CAD Government of Andhra Pradesh Room No7 floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy rtment Governm of Jharkhand Nepal H Ranchi834 001 (Jharkhand)
ment of Bihar Sinchai Bhawan Patna-800 015
29 Chief Engineer (PMO) CWC New DeihL 30 Chief Engineer (FMO)eWcr New Delhi 31 Chief Engi Low~f Ganga Basinj WC 1 napuri Patna-800 001
(Bihar) Engineer
Basin Or neer Gan
Nagar Lucknow- (Uttar
CWC Chandigprh
33 Chief Engineer CWC Hyderqbad (Andhra Pradesh) Ch Engi ipn ewe Kalindr Bhawan New Delhi
CWCI Janhavi Bhawan 212496 Indira35 Chief
28
ry Irrigation amp Public Health Government of Himachal Pradesh la-171 002
ry Departm of Irrigation amp Flood Control Government of Assam Guwahati-781 006
Secretary Water PC)VU
Copy information to to SecretarYI MioistrYof Water Room tJo-407 New Delhi 36
j
)
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10sth MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOODmiddot CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 1sth SEPTEMBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 106th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals vyas held on 16092010 at 1000 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requested the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 105ih Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter No16272010-PA(N)1240-i6 dated 21052010 MembershySecretary informed the Cornrpittee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee coJ1firmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 105th
Advisory Committee meeting ~~i~i II) PROJECT PROPOSAlS PUT tjP ~F6R CONSIDERATION OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
1 J CHOKKA RAO GODAVARI LIS ANDHRA PRADESH (REVISED- MAJOR)
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The project proposal was middot earlier
considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting held on 02032007 and was
accepted for Rs 6016 Crore Planning Commission subsequently accorded investment
clearance to the proposal on 23032007 The State Govt has now submitted Revised
Cost Estimate at price level 2009-10 without change in scope The cost estimate for the
project has been finalized as Rs 942773 crore (PL-2009-10) with BC Ratio as 137 An
expenditure of Rs 378302 crore has been incurred up to March 2010 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained (copy enclosed as Annexure-II)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about the original time frame for completion of the project
and reasons for delay Secretary Irrigation Govt of Andhra Pradesh intimated that
1
originally the project was to be completed by 2008-09 but due to land acquisition problem
and want of forest clearance the project could not be completed as per original schedule )
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
11e also informed that now land acquisition has completed the project for
execution purpose has been divided into 3 phases out of which most of the works under
phase-I amp II has been completed while the works under Phase-III is yet to started
However contract has already been awarded As such the project would be completed
as per revised time schedule Chairman of the committee Secretary (WR) suggested to
optimize use of water by using micro irrigation system in the command to tlie
maximum possible extent as the project is basically lift irrigation scheme Project
Authority informed that there is already a provision of drip irrigation in some of
command
On a query raised by (WR) Secretary (Irrigation) Govt of Andhra
Pradesh stated that State Govt would adequate provision for the maintenance of
the project
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the condition that
project should be completed by March 2013 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by this Committee~
2 DURGAWATI RESERVOIR P bull ~t- (REVISEDMAJOR) BIHAR
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Durgawati Project
envisages construction of an earthen dam of length 1830 hl with spillway across the rivet
Durgawati in Bihar The Dam is located near village Karamchat in KaimurDistrict of Bihar
to irrigate an area of 42900 ha annually in drought prone districts of Bhabhua and Rohtas
in Bihar
The Scheme was originally approved by the Planning Commission in May 1975 for
2530 crore State Govt subsequently modifled the cost estimate which was
) examined in CWC and cost of the project was finalized for Rs 2344 crore at 1998
price level same was accepted by Advisory Committee of MOWR in its 72nd
meeting on 18012000 subject to theforest clearance from MoEF As such the project
) was not accorded investment clearance from Planning Commission
Now the State Govt has submitted the forest clearance of MoEF along with the
at 2009-10 Price Level same has been finalized as Rs98310 Cr
(2009 -10 PL) with BC Ratio as 113 The State Concurrence has also been
obtained for the finalized cost
2
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for ovron iture of 15 cr against
the approved cost of 2530 cr State representative replied that State Govt has
incurred such expenditure due advance deposit to Forest Department for undertaking
compensatory afforestation
Dy Advisor Planning Commission advised State Govt to provide sprinkler
irrigation system in some of its command for efficient use of water instead of Flood
irrigation
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal with the condition that
the project should be completed by March 2012 and no further costtime overrun will be
considered by the Committee
3 BALH VALLEY (LEFT BANK) IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED MEDIUM) HIMACHALPRADESH
(PAO) CWC introduced the project The Balh Valley Medium IrrIgation
Project envisagesmiddot of irrigation facilities to villages located in the valley
covering a culturablecommand area hectare The irrigation is to be provided by
tapping water from BBMS Hydel 1middotmiddot Suketi Khad
project was earlier approved by Planning CommissIon in June for Rs
4164 Cr L 1999~2000) Later on cost estimate the project was
accepted by Technical AdviSOry Committee of MqWR in its 8ih Meeting held on
17112006 for Rs6225 Gr Planning Commission subsequently accorded investmentmiddot
clearance to the proposal in March 2007
The State Govt now submitted 2nd Revised Cost Estimate without change in
The cost estimate for project has been finalized as 10378 (2010 PL)
with BC ratio of 1 Finance Concurrence also been obtained for the finalized
cost Advisor (Cost) enquired about reason for delay in execution and substantial
of the cost due to change in design Project authorities informed that distribution
system had changed from open channel to H pressurizedmiddot pipes in a stretch of
1848 km in order to reduce conveyance loss thus resulting in increase in cost apart from
price escalation On a query from Secretary (WR) Project Authorities further informed that
100 irrigation would be provided through sprinkler system and project would
completed by March 2012
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
3
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
I I
GUMANI
- MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project The Gumani Barrage project
construction of a across Gumani River tributary of Ganga in
Jharkhand The Barrage is located near the village Petkhasa in Sahibganj District of
Jharkhand Main canal of 3360 km length with a network of distribution system provides
annual irrigation of 16194 ha to benefit drought prone districts of Sahibganj and Pakur
The Project was originally approved by the Planning Commission in January 1976
for Rs 384 crore Subsequently the Advisory Committee of MoWR accepted the project
for revised cost amounting Rs croreat 1996 price level in in its 70th meeting held
on 27011999 subject to certain observations However the project was not accorded
investment clearance by Planning Commission for want of forest clearance from MoEF
Now the State Govt has submitted Forest qf the project along with the Revised
Cost Estimate at 2008-09 price level without change in cost estimate for the
project has finalized 18576 crore (PL-2008-Q9) with ratio of 169
Advisor (Cost) enquired about 9Jiginal and schedule of the project
Project Authorities r~plied that as original schedule the project was to be
completed in 2001 but for want of the forest clearance the project could not be completed
As per the revised schedu the project is to be completed by March 201
Secretary (WR) asked about non-submission of St~te Finance Concurrence The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs -16259 cr at 2004 price level Now the project has
finalized for Rs 18576 cr at 2008-09 price level Since the increase in cost is less than
20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the
Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001 a copy enclosed at Annex- III
(A) amp (B)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) JHARKHAND
(PAD) CWC briefly introduced the project Subernarekha Multipurpose project
envisages construction of two dams namely Chandil and Ichha and two Barrages namely
Galudih and Kharkai across Subernarekha and Kharkai respectively with an
4
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
~
I
extensive network of canal system off taking from the headworks of Ichha Chandil I I
Galudih and Kharakai The project will provide irrigation to 1 54802 ha (CCA) with annLtal I
irrigation of 2 36846 ha This will provide irrigation facilitates to East Singhbhum West I Singhbhum and Sarai Kela- Khansawa Districts of Jharkahnd
T~e scheme was originally accepted by TAC during 1982 for an estimated cost of
Rs 48090 Cr which has also been accorded investment clearance from the Planning
Commission Its 1st revised estimate was also accepted by the Advisory committee in its
53rd meeting held on 08121992 for Rs142882 crore subject to certain observations
However the project was not accorded investment clearance by Planning Commission for
want of forest clearance from MoEF and clearance from Ministry of Welfare
2ndThe Govt of Jharkahnd has now submitted revised cost estimate without
change in scope along with Forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha and the Ministry of Welfare clearance It has been stated in the letter of the
Forest Department of Jharkhand that the diversion of 145 26 ha of forest land falling in
Dalma wildlife sanctuary wflJbe consid~red after receipt of compliance of various
conditions stipulated by the Standing G~Qirriiltee of Natio~al Board of Wildlife (NBWL) and bull lt ~1tt1
as directed by the Honble Supremecotfft~ The cost estimate for the project has been
finalized as Rs 661374 Cr at 2010 price level with BC ratio of 176 State Finance
Concurrence is also yet to be submitted by the project Authorities
Secretary (WR) observed that out of total forest land of 180082 ha clearance for
diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary is
essential for consideration of the project by the Advisory Committee Accordingly he
directed the Principal Secretary (WR) Govt of Jharkhand to expedite the clearance of
NBWL and concurrence of the State Finance Department
After brief discussion Committee deferred the proposal on account of nonshy
submission of following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under
Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
oj
The representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the same
within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
5
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
6 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHTRA (REVISED shy
MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Lower Wardha Irrigation
Project envisages construction of a 9464 m long earthen dam across River Wardha a
tributary of Pranhita river in Godavari basin The proposed project is located near Village
Dhanodi Taluka Arvi in district Wardha of Maharashtra is planned to irrigate annually an
area of 63333 ha in Wardha district The project is included in the Honble Prime
Minister Package for agrarian distressed district of Maharashtra
The project was earlier considered by the Advisory committee in its 88th meeting
held on 02032007 and was accepted for Rs 85770 Crore at PL2005-2006 and
accordingly Planning Commi~sr6n accorded investment clearance to the proposal in
February 2008
Now the project aut~rWes have submitted revised proposal by including lift
irrigation components upstream of the ~1t~~JQg reservoir and two barrages downstream of ~ ~~~ ~~-lt ) ~ ~
the existing reservoir namely Pulgaon ~m~Kharda to irrigate additional annual irrigation of I
11678 ha
The Revised project proposal has been examined in CWCother Central Agencies
and the cost of the project has been finalized forRs 2Z324middot1crore at 2008-09 price level
with BC ratio as 155 State Finange Conc~r~enceha~ also been obtained
The Chairman enquiredthat why the revised cost of the project (Rs 223241 Cr) is
so high with respect to its originally approved cost (85770 Cr) in February 2008 The
Project Authorities replied that the main reasons for increase in cost are due to new
provision of Lift component and other two barrages namely Pulgaon and Kharda in
downstream of the dam In addition price escalation of certain items has also resulted in
higher cost of the project Representative from Ministry of Finance enquired that why lift
component and other barrages have been proposed in the revised project The project
authorities replied that by provision of lift and other barrages an additional area of 11678
ha would be brought under irrigation In addition 1080 MCM of drinking water has also
been contemplated for supply from Kharda Barrage Secretary (WR) questioned that
instead of proposing for other additional components in the original Lower Wardha
Project why not the originally approved project could be completed first and separate
6
middotmiddot middot middotmiddot1 t I bull
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
)
)
)
proJect would framed up for the proposed additional irrigation components The project
authorities replied that the present revised Lower Wardha Project is meant for
augmentation of the original project to provide irrigation benefits to adjacent command
area and to supply water for drinking purpose and Lanco Power Plant The project
authorities also mentioned that the integrated Lower Wardha Project is under Honble
PMs package for distressed districts of Maharashtra The Ratio for the revised
Lower Wardha Project has been worked out to 1 considering the above additional
components Secretary (WR) asked project authorities to submit proper justification
regarding the benefits accrued by the present revised proposal of Lower Wardha Project
against the originally approved project
After detailed discussions the committee deferred the proposal and the project authorities were advised to submit proper justification of increasing the scope of the proJectmiddot
7 KANDI CANAL STAGE-II (REViSED-MAJOR)PUNJAB
(PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project original proposal of Kandi
Canal I was earlier considered Advisory in its 71 51 Meeting held
on 03081999 and was accepted for 12 crore Accorcentingly Planning Commission
accorded investment cl~arance to the proposal on 050420Q2
Subsequently 151 revised Cost Estimate of the project was accepted by the Advisory
Committee in its 95th meeting held in January 2009 for Rs 34662 crore and Investment
Clearance was accorded by the Planning Commission to the revised project on
12042010
The Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at November 2009
price level without change in SCCtoe The same been examined in CWC Revision in
cost has been necessary mainly due to price escalation and inadequate provision in
the earlier estimate
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 54024 crore at
November 2009 price level with BC ratio of 1 State Finance Concurrence has been
submitted by the project authorities
The committee enquired about the reasons behind so much increase in the cost in
a of just 2 years The project authority informed that the cost has been increased
due modifications in thickness of lining in distributaries from 4 to for its safety point
7
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
j ~
of view in accordance with the decision of Govt of Punjab at a later date and also due to
price escalation
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2012 and no further time and cost overrun
would be accepted by the committee
8 MODERNISATION OF GANG CANAL SYSTEM RAJASTHAN (REVISED MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The original proposal bf
modernization of Gang Canal System was earlier considered by the Advisory committee
73rdin its meeting held on 31052000 and was accepted for Rs 44573 Crore
Accordingly Planning Comrnissionaccorded investment clearance to the proposal on
23092000
The State Goyt n-as now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at price level 2008shy
2009 without change in scoPr The cost of the project has peen finalized for Rs 62142
Crore at 2008-09 PL with BC ratio a~ t1~ Q State Finance Concurrence has also been middot middot r bull
submitted by the projeCt authorities
Secretary (WR) asked why the provision for land co~t in the original estimate was
kept as middot1104 crore wher~as in the present revised estimafe the cos aginst this item has
been shown as 1336 middotIakh The project authorities replied that in the earlier estimate the
higher provision was kept with the anticipation of additional land acquisition for canals
whereas during the execution the additional land was not required
After brief discussion the Committee accepted the proposal with the conditi9n that
the project should be completed by March 2013 and no further cost and time overrun
would be considered by the Committee )
9 BADAUN IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW- MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Badaun Irrigation Project envisages
construction of a 490 m long barrage across river Ramganga (a tributary of Ganga river)
to utilize monsoon discharge by diverting 56 cumec through canal on right side of the
barrage The project is located on Bareilly-Mathura state highway and about 10 km south
of Bareilly city The project would provide irrigation benefits to an area of 37453 ha
annually (CCA-53504 ha) in Badaun and Bareilly districts of Uttar Pradesh
8
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
09
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs33212 Crore 2008shy
Level with BC ratio of 169 Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (Annexure- IV)
It was stated by the Member Secretary that Ganga Wing MoWR has suggested for
monitoring of barrage operation for ensuring no withdrawal during the lean period from 1 st
January to 31 st May in view of the Indo Bangia Desh agreement The projet Authorites
rplied that due to storage in existing Kalagarh reservoir in upstream of the proposed
barrage there would not be sufficient water in the pondage of the barrage
After discussion committee accepted the proposal
10 BANSAGAR CANAL PROJECT UTTAR PRADESH (MAJOR-REVISED)
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Bansagar Canal Project envisages
construction of a lined cClhaltaking off from common feeder which in turn takes off from
Bansagar Dam Bansagar is situated in Madhya Pradesh across river Sone in
Shahdol District and is a joint of Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh and
Bihar under the inter-state agreement aJjjiQI1I~t
1stThe revised estimate of Bansagar Canal Project was considered and
accepted by the Advisory Committee in its 90th meeting held on 26092007 for Rs
205335 crore (including share cost of the dam) at 2006 level and investment
clearance to the same was accOrded by the Planning Commission in April 2008
The Government of Uttar Pradesh has noW submitted 2nd Revised Cost
without change in scope The same been examined in CWC and the cost has been
finalized for Rs 314891 crore at 2008-09 price level including share cost of Rs 45803
crore to be borne by the Govt of Uttar Pradesh towards construction of common
components of Bansagar Dam Project
ratio of the proposal has been worked out to be 111 State Finance
Concurrence has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The committee observed that the cost has been finalized at 2008-09 PL and how
the project will be completed on this finalized cost The project authority informed that
most of the work has been awarded So the project will be completed at this finalized
and no further cost escalation would be allowed
9
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal subject to the condition
that the project would be completed by March 2013 at the finalized cost and further time
and cost overrun would not be considered by the committee
11 KANHAR IRRIGATION PROJECT (NEW -MAJOR) UTTAR PRADESH
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Kanhar Irrigation Project
envisages construction of a 3003 km long earthen dam across river Kanhar a tributary of
river Sone The project is proposed to provide irrigation benefits to an area of 27898 ha
(CCA-26075 ha) annualiy to the Dudhi and Robertsganj Tehsils bf Sonebhadra District
which falls in the drought prone area ()fUJt~r Pradesh
The Cost Estimate for the project has been finalized as Rs 65259 crore at 2008shy
09Price Level with BC ratio of 117 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by
the Project Authorities (AnnexureV)
Ganga Wing MoWR h~sinformed vide their letter No 7J17J2008-GangaJ 5511-13
dated 15th September 2010 that TAC ~ 9f Kanhar Irrigation Project does not have any J ~) ~~ t middot
information about international aspecr~ ~middot prbject The prqJect authorities informed that
Kanhar Project ha~ been taken up for utilizing 015 MAFof Kanhar water out of total
16thallocation of 025 MAF to Uttar Pradesh as per Bansag~r Agreement (reached on
September 1973 prior to Ineto-Bangladesh treatyon sharing of Gaga water)
After brief discussion thecoO)rnittee accepted the proposal ~~
12 RESTORING CAPACITY OF WESTERN GANDAK CANAL SYSTEM UTTAR PRADESH (NEW-ERM -MAJOR-)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Western Gandak Canal project
(UP portion) was originally approved by Planning Commission in the year 1960 for an
estimated cost of Rs 5039 crore The work on this project was started in the year 1961
and completed in the year 1994 Later on the revised estimate of the project was
considered in the 5yth meeting of TAC held on 27011994 for Rs 15438 crore However
Planning Commission did not accord investment clearance to revised cost of the project
The Govt of Uttar Pradesh has now submitted the ERM proposal of the existing
project to restore the designed discharge of the main canal branch canal as well as I I distributaries which is reduced substantially due to accumulation of silt The present
10
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
proposal will restore the irrigation potential of 178 lakh ha in order to utilize full designed
irrigation potential of lakh ha which would nefit Gorakhpur Maharajganj
Kushinagar and Deoria Districts of Uttar Pradesh
The cost estimate for the project has been finalized as 21712 Cr at 2009 -10 price
with BC ratio of 404 Finance Concurrence has also been submitted by the
state government
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
13 RAISING AND STRENGTHENING OF TRIBUTARY DYKE ALONG BOTH BANKS OF KOPILLI RIVER FROM CHARAIHAGI TO TUKLAIUP (LIB) BASUNDHARI TO KILLING KOPILLI JUNCTION (LIB) AND CHAPARMUKH TO AHOTGURI AMSOI PWD ROAD (RiB) INCLUDING ANTI EROSION MEASURES AT DIFFERENT REACHES
(PAO) CWC bri~fly introduced the project proposed scheme envisages
raising and strengthening of embankments dyke and cohptruction of launching apron to
prevent floods and erosiohboth Nagaon and Morigaoh districts of Assam wiIJ
benefit around 26000 ha of homesteaq land including thickly populated
villages other public and private a population 350000
The project been examined in eWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized Rs 11 at 2009-10 price level
with BC ratio of 218 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VI)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
14 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVER BANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENTmiddot PROJECT - DIBRUGARH SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project proposed sub project
envisages raising and strengthening of Dibrugarh Town Protection (DTP) dyke and
construction of launching apron to prevent floods and erosion in affected the
Dibrugarh District will benefit around 4 ha of cultivated homestead land
) including thickly populated villages other public and private properties and a population of
150000
The project has been examined in CWCother Central and the
11
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
estimate for the Scheme has been finalized at 6133 Crore at 2009-10 with BC
ratio of 227 Finance Concurrence has submitted by the project authorities
(Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted proposal
15 ASSAM INTEGRATED FLOOD RIVERBANK EROSION RISK MANAGEMENT PROJECT - PALASBARI SUB PROJECT
(PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed project envisages
construction of revetment at Paiasbari Gumi and Raising and Strengthening of
embankment at Palasbari The main objective of this scheme is to protect 621 ha area
of land comprising cultivable homestead fallow land schools and institutes market
complexes and road communication with benefits to a population of 500000
The project has examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized Rs 1 at 2009-1 degprice level
with BC ratio of 335 Concurrence has submitted by the project
authorities (Annexure-VII)
After brief discussion the accepted the proRosal
16 SCHEME FOR ~LOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGARGORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed flood protection
scheme envisages anti-erosion works Bunds along left and right banks of river Rapt
10 locations to protect important cities villages and culturable land in Siddharthnagar
SanLKabir Nagar Gorakhpur and Deoria districts of UP severe erosion and water
logging had been taken place
The project hasmiddot been examined in CWCother Central Agencies and the cost
estimate for Scheme has been finalized at Rs Crore 2009-10 Price Level
with BC ratio of 364 State Finance Concurrence has not been submitted by the project
authorities
Since State Finance Concurrence not furnished after brief discussion the
committee the proposal
12
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
17) Maniyari Tank Project (Major ERMqNew) Chhattisgarh
Chief PAO briefly introd the project and intimated that the proposal
at an estimated cost of Rs 15995 was considered in the 105th TAC Meeting held on
25062010 and deferred due to non-submission of Finance Concurrence State
Finance Concurrence now been submitted by the project authorities for Rs 15995
vide letter No 3AIBP12004-Bilaspur dated 2172010 (Annexure-VIII)
After brief discussion the committee accepted the proposal
III) It was brought to the notice of all members that the Guidelines for Submission
Appraisal and Clearance of Irrigation and MultipurposeProjects has been revised withthe
approval of the Secretary (WR) Chairmaoof the Advisory Committee and issued to all the
State Governments on 31 st August O
IV) Chairman observe~that current average cost of on farm development of command
area is Rs20OOOr heqtare which should be considered (if not already taken in
estimate) while computing the BC project This should be revised from time
to time as cost per hectare Command Area Development and Water
Management Programme is revised
Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the chair
)
)
)
13
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
SI Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 A K Bajaj Chairman CWC New Delhi Member
3 P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Secretary Member (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
4 S KThakur Director (Finance) (Representing Financial Advisor Member Ministry of Water Resources)
5 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
6 S Das Deputy Secretary (Representing Ministry of Tribal Affairs) Member
7 C M Pandey Additional Commissioner (Representing Ministry of Member Agriculture)
8 J S Bawa DirectorCEA (Representing Ministry of Power and Member Central ElectriCity Authority)
9 S K Srivastava Chief Engineer PAO CWC New-Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of water Resources SShri - 10 S P Kakran Commissioner (Ganga) MaWR
11 V K Nagpure Sr Joint Commissioner MOWR )
b) Central Water Gommission
J SI Shri
0) 12 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) ewc New Delhi
13 A K Ganju Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi and Chairman GFCC Patna ) 14 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
J 15 Rajesh KumarChief Engineer FMOCWC New Delhi
16 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
) - 17 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
18 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi ) 19 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
J 20 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
J 21 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
) 22 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
23 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi J
14
J
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
Deepak Kumar DirectorFM-II CWC New Delhi
25 M W Paunikar DD PA(N) CWC New Delhi
26 Sudhir Kumar DD PA(S) CWC NewDelhi
27 Bashishtha Rai DD PA(C) CWC New Delhi
28 Sureshwar Singh Bonal DD CA(I) CWC New Delhi
Piyush Kumar DD FM-II CWC New Delhi
c) GFCC
30 SMasood Husain Member (Planning) Patna
d) State Government officers
Sf Shri
Andhra Pradesh
31 Aditya Nath Das Secretary Irrigation Govtof AnqhraPradesh Hyderabad
32 N Reddy (lrr i ) Govtof Andhra Hyderabad
33 KRamakrishna Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
34 Y Mahadev Warangal
Assam
Jnhin Chakaraborthy Chief Engineer WR Deptt Govt of Assam Guwahati
Bihar
36 Devi Rajak Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Pafna
37 OPAmbarker Chief WRD Govtof Bihar Patna
38 MK Das WRD Govtof Bihar
Himachal Pradesh )
39 RKSharma IPH Deptt Govt of Himachal rnco
Jharkhand
40 Poddar Principal WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
41 RM RavidasEngineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of Iharkhand Ranchi
42 BMKumar Chief WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur )
43 GRam Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
44 RSTigga Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi ) 45 BKSingh WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
) 46 BC Mandai WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
)
15
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
Maharashtra 47 Pati SecretaryWR Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
48 SNHuddar Advisor Govt Maharashtra Pune
49 H Y Kolawale Director VIDC Nagpur
50 NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Nagpur
Punjab
51 Hussan Lal of Punjab Chandigarh
52 Varinder Kumar Kandi Canal Govt of Punjab Hoshiarpur
Rajasthan
SCMaharshi WRD Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
MR Dood Ganganagar
Uttar Pradesh
Suresh Tiwari C (DampP) Irrigation Department Lucknow
A K Ojha CE IampP UP lrrigation Luoknow
57 SV Singh Irrigation Department Lucknow
58 AP Aggarwal Irrigation Department LUcknow
59 Sandeep KumarSEIrrigation Department Lucknow
LR Adlakha
61 Irrigation
SNKanntia Irrigation Depadhlent Mirzapur
63 Ram SE Irrigation Department Gorakhpur
64 Vishwanath Shukla EE Irrigation Kusllinagar
)
)
)
j
16
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
middot i 1hmiddotpmiddot bull (-middot A ~N ~XUFZ~- IT J Cl1o~kJ RoO Devadula lin IrrigCltioh Scheme Grounding of works with 5tltlte Funds Re-vISed
ctpprovClI - PJrtlal Modification - Orders Issued
IRRIGATION amp CAD (PWMAJIRRIVl) DEPARTMENT
Patedjlij-Q9-ZQlQ ~
CO RtNo599 Irrigutionamp CAl) (PWMajIrTNl) DepClrtment dt 14middot092010
In portial modification of the orders Issued in the GO read abo~ the following
wn~truction programme for execution of GLIS Is approved for the revised project cost of [h94273 Crates The works shall be executed with funds of State Government initinlly and by
(Jbt1ining Cmtrul Assistanceexternal funds after obtaining necessary clearances
- _-- shyYx~)~i~rf~lPto fJJ1amlal Year 2qO~-10 rxpenditure for nnancial Year 201(-1l Expenditure for FinallcialYear 2011-12
[xpetlditure for FlnJIKial Year 2012-13 --_shy1T_olill_ - - - - -
378302 Crores 317993 emres --1 i92405 Crores -
54013 C~o~es 94n73 Crote~
The order issues With the concurrtJceof Finance (WampR) Depi)ftment vida thelt IJONo1G30r4(1)lOmiddotOl dt 16-09-201O -
~
J nle Chief EnglneerGLlSiha take further necessary action a-tcordlrigJy - ~ 1- bull
BY ORDER ANQll NTAE NAME OF rHE -G(jVERNOR OF ANDH~PRADESH
ADm~ tiAlrH DAS SEtittrARY tcfGOVERNMe-NT
1u tf~
Ihe Chief Lngincer t~
Godavari ( ift Irrlgatlon Scheme ~
yenCroluny Chlnlagattu W(1(lngal
)
Copy to ) [he finance (WampP) Department
f~jC
IFORWARDED BY ORDERI)
)
)
j
) l d 88pound28Lpound2 Ql lLI72Sbpound201716
)
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
Letter No ]PMClVividhl15404- IRanchi Dated
From
To Shri UN Panjiyar
to Govt of India Ministry of Water Resources Shram Shakti New Delhi -110001
Sub State Finance Concurrence for Gumani Barrage Project (Major-Revised) lharkhand
Ref Letter no I (N) I 1504-05 dated 130820 I 0 of Central Water Commission New
With reference to the above mentioned subject this is to inform that with the concurrence of state finance Approv1 of has been accorded for Rs16259 cr vide Govt Order no~ Ranchildated the CWChas cr which is
The cost of the project on 2008-09 of the amount of Administrative Qval 1 R -1022000-4151 1 Cabinet Secretariat of lharkhand concurrence required( copy of the said notification is en
The cost of Department Govt of before Technical
arrived at by hence it is requested that
of MoWR Gol for appmval
CWC is well within 20 as per Notification no CS
Department Govt of cabinet is not
to the Water Resources project proposal may be placed
An early action is Yours faithfully
En as above Poddar)
lAS Principal p(rpr-
Letter No - IPMClVividhII 5404- 7~ Ranchi Dated I
Copy forwarded to SriAjay Kumar Director PA Appraisal Central Water Commission 407 (S)
Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi in reference to~ for infonnation amp necessary action )
flJ L
~J~ ) i ~- ~
(RS Poddar)) Principal
)
J
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
--
rmiddot
I ~
~~
~1fQon
-TR0 3Rlgt I ~~ c$ 3i~~i66 ~ ~ (3)
~ ~IRffim ~ ~ ~ sectlJ ~~~~ltliejqlcl Cfif5iCHO$C1
-~ TICf centtfI~l~ fcrmur r$T ~iFiT m~f~middot07 ~4iCf) 16 (JJ(JktloJ1t~~ I
J ampT~ ~ ~ ~I~~os cpi4QIWGi5r ~iT -7ft 20_00 it fatk1~Ra(1bull bull t
R~iT-~
bull J
~-J5 middot1514Q 1k1Et5I ~~Jnqclt 2000 ctl ~ 31~iampJl ~ ~ ~ bull~I4~
31 cf 3fcmr 3lcJ5 1ci ~~ 1500000 ~~~~ aror) ~ crr +
fcllaquoIRw com SQ ~~ q~ 100000001- (lTcP ~) ~
~ltrrf(rn ~ ~ ~ I
fGj amiddotn den -$ C[(ft~ 31 ~Fi-eft $ ~ ~ 35 ot3tmKr UTCftJTGfT ciT
rn2llfq(j ~ St ~~ lR ~tijfc1R~k1 middot eQRTmcr ~~
~ OOffi ~ shy
I )
12 )
19
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
141002 9 2010 1~ 13 FAX 06512491158
~ ~ 31TCTffi ~
im daft -a eT ~
~Tef cwrr Gi la~ II I ~r (pal qft ~=-rri
fR fu~ ampRT qft
~
g-~TRft NffITJi cf ~ qft 2rcrrrDrTT CJl ~bull ~rr C5Z facu r~ ~r-rl ~ Pcrarrar
~CKr ~IT
n1--rrT 861all fGF8 $1
~~y
N
20 ~~Rf 36 (J ill I ltif
3Plffi 6TJft I
~ 50Rmf it
~J ct ~c1 ~ em 3rrq~ICfjC11 ctt iIvft 3ITtr20 ~T ~ ~fT -rJ1-tt ~-r-J
13
D
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
09 2llO 13 13 06512491158
--shyq5y GTIc1cEDfl ~ fftr
( 1 ) FampHWlti
3fR-~ ~
~ am ~cnT ~3fR
~ -
ri1 jj Cj I lci ~ it ~~r-=r ~ 1IMd iclt ~
crcift i3lRt
14
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
09
-
61 (fGIT ~ aqajq crmt ~ eft
3nltr~mo fdCl~UI ~ ~ ~ it 3fR
CTTlt4T =816l1ltil ~ em rn~cp~ ~ ~ ctt (f ml ~ gW- ~ itml
lID 004
2010 13 14 FAX 06512491158
- ~
~~ l1616i I 801 em qft fcRr fltr~ 1ltRT yen middot~_ ~_~~_ctr
3ITQ~G[Cfiffi artt i1m ar~fcf PcB ~ cwrc iT ~nftra fcvw ~ ~ ~
bull t
)
-
Pcra- ftmmmiddot em- ~m ~ reg am iit ~
ilr ~ 20 -~~~ a
- ---iZ shy =
1It
oc - - n=- ~ ~
I~ ~- I
Uta5 m0QRl3fR-1022000 41$4middot I Jrm middot -i 18 ml1JdRr bull --- - - I ~~~~ ~I I
~middot~ttJ
) )lfuff1fQ - ~IWlQIC1 $ UElTQf ~ ~ ~IltomOSI ~ampJa1$f1 ~
2 OJ~-os Jfcmi
a~ctJli c$ ~ - ~~ P~
i r f41A
shy
2001
~
~
Jri cB ltrt-ft ~ tFi ~QI ~Ht ~I zra-fi fumprrfu~ ciT ~cl QCf
)~~ Cl5ha rt g ~ I
) Iir 11 ~ I
) ~os wmI
) lt4 lCl5I~ m~
)
)
) 15
)
J
)
)
J )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1 2550436C
ampffi- ~=~
~- ~IPG1 ~ ~o 1625667 ~ ~o ~m itffiO
nllflPtib ~lttt~ 5 ~ if I
iI1if ~ ~ 3l~ lIgifliJl
ft1 ii11iPa rwTI ~ ~ Ii ~o 1625867 ~
~ iITflO
2 ff ~ ~
3 ~
4
5
6
7
8 ~
23
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
~-
- 1 ~o -To 01 Rl ffI rq Iffr
)
)
)
)
J )
)
)
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
IZE
rs- 2010
~ ~
0SU2 7 8200 6-mOTIO
q 11 lt~il 31 C I lt$I 33212
~I
1527-29 1 7 - 0 8 shy 1 O qr
2
( ~ )
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
j J
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Badaun Irrigation Scheme has been submitted to Central Water
Commission New Delhi Central Water Commission has evaluated this Scheme
for Rs 33212 Crore Financial Concurrence for Badaun Irrigation Scheme IS
hereby accorded
N~~J~~ Engineer-in-lihief (Eastern Ganga) (Design amp Planning)
Irrigation Departm~nt uP Irrigation Department UP Moradabad~ Lucknow
~
Principal Secr~tary Principal Secr~tary (Irrigation) (Finance)
GovernmenimiddotofUP Government ofUP Luckriow Lucknow
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
~7
itcn
~TGf ~ 31 GlRilI 9 ~gt~~ ~-ifu (~ ~
3090 ~TR-iG1 I
cB ~~TCP
~I~cFC L9ltJiC1 (c=rrcl) cfgtccentlil~Cf 3ncirltYr crf T( m=iT_ IT -
m7H $ ~anltJT-4
lt4lCJQ I-A 2751 1 0 -27 -fuo -4-1 72 (6CltGIJ-qfi-Ol (I IS
~~~ ltHRlt1 dCf)
~3I)-gO ~ CfgtCigt6l QUdk1C11
(ff~
3 qCfd fa~ ltQfh Cflq lt= ~ ~ ~~(ltzl O1 3 ltgt1 200 IS -lfTo 120 (L0J)t
574-76 Y8Ci0middotmiddot 24-08-1 0 ~Pil ~icentH ~ cb-~ CflT ~ ~ R1~ic8) ~W~
ampRT cpG16l qR~IIi1G1 cBT 3llcbf=~0~ regIltgtCi ~o 6 5~ 58 ~ ~ ~ qft i
fa CC1f1 Gl ~6~ 3 q C1 CU ~ ~ qft Wr-~) CJf ~ ~
2- ~ ~ -a Cf)~e R4tlllt$ q~C~1G1 q r- ~ c51Rlrrflil 2le-Cf1k1
-i C1 () Cj Cf5lt ~ ~ ~ 3-1T47r 2-l ~~ if ~ fcp CQ q P q Rcj Ii1 C1 cBT
65258
)
)
gtl~ ~q f
-9t2ooCl ~~Gc-I Q1gt4 fu~7 309) ~~C =5 ) 3fTaiGlcltIT (tTRO Qc1 fumo) R~ill$ mamp-ffltJT 3090 C1~~
3-ffjOj Gl Ci(j f (cnur 2~ I () 12) R~ TJ I fuyenltYf 3 (1 -g ( $C1 euro J I )
)
)
~
Cf5f0qr6i 66 9Tq-(1 gt
27- ( ~ rClC1 ~~ )
ci 9gtlttt1 Rfuq I
i
I
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
lrrigation ProJen co
Commission New Delhi Water Commision ha evaluated this Project
Rs 65258 crore for Kanhar lmject is hereby
Chief
(Bansagar Canal Project) c Engi~~~f
(Design amp Planning) l)P uP
Principal Principal Secretary (Irrigation) (Finance)
UP Lucknow
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
ln~ ttwt(l middotnan nilll ~NHl Crniml
GD cru fil f [i I UF NNEXVR n~-ANCK ( IUPARTJ1KNT
~r( frrUlTt- -~middotpoundl~v r~~l~~
Pgt( N( 011-26 i OJ 6 [
r(r S~eme3 nndtt F-
for the
(ioernttQnt of
Ulnrh (lr
(~ 11 H11rkr Ihi
Illltuii)llia ll](gt
IlllonmirllL[( Rteos to
)
)
)
for
)
)
)
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
ENT OF ASAM OF 1HE AND FINANCE DEPT1
DISPUR
No CampSFin10971 Dated alspuf
from
tnth~
FInance Depi31rtment
lO The Engineer (FM-II) Project Approval Organisation
Centr-ill Water Commission Seva Bhavan ItKPuram New Delhi
~ub Finance provisions flrnmdinijJ=MP works in Oibrugarh and in
Assam under NFRERMIP
2010
letter NoCfJSflnlf1970 datid
accord~Q
the that
(iovernmen of tci(arancefor Oibrugarh Palasb~ri
ubprojects forRs cror(~s respe~lvelVI under the afores1d
inv~stment program Necessary blldget~lry the effect has been provid~d
) ill State blldget to mdet the expenditure abo~e 2 projects
)
)
)
) Memo No C8SFjn10~l7tAf Digtpur the 20th 2010
COP to L Addltion~1 ~~(etary to the Government of Assam Water Department for ~ind irlformatkmiddotr and action
)
) Water Department for information l11d
G()vernrrl(~nt of
J
)
)
) 3D
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
Govt of Chhattisgarh Wa Resources Deptt
Ma laya KS Bhawan Raipur
2010IF-9-JO-31 22009 purMemo I IAbc Dwuty Advisor (WR) I
PI~nning Commission na Bhavan
Sub - Sta Rinance Concurrencc to Maniya project tank of BUaspur Distridt
inform you that the Department Govt
Cbhattisgarh accorded to Maniyari
Tank crores (Rs one hundred nine crare amp
five additional area of 1 15
I be irrigated )
blocks of Bilaspur district
The provision of a of 2010-11 has m
the )
It therefore to accord investment to )
proposal so that this may be included under AIBP
Encl- NiL M) ~ Igt~~~ (CK Khaitan~
Secretary Water Rcsoprces Department
) Mantralaya Raipur
)
) IBMmiddotEmiddotDRNEmiddotHKY 143EL REDDY SIR
)
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
J
IF-9-1 18-22009 Raipu- 1092010
forwarded to
Bilaspur with reference to memo
nO20AIBP2010307)
20082010 information and necessary
action
The Chief
Nil Officer on Special Duty
Water Re~ourccs Department Mantralaya Raipur
IBMmiddotEmiddotDRIVEmiddotHKY 143middotEL REDDY SIR
3
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
No 16272010-PA (N)YJ-~ ~t GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CENTRAL WATER COMMISSION PROJECT APPRAISAL ORGANIZATION
407 SEWA BHAWAN R K PURAM NEW DELHI-110 066
Date 04112010Dg
Sub 107th meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of technoshyeconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multipurpose Project proposals held on 27102010
Enclosed please find herewith a copy of the summary record of discussions of the
above meeting held at New Delhi on 27th October 2010 at Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New
Delhi for information and necessary action
Encl As above ~ ()rvvvc_ (SK SriVastava) 6 y 111)
Chief Engineer (PAO) amp Member Secretary of the
Advisory Committee
To Members of Committee
1 Chairman CWC Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 2 Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance (lst Floor) North BlockNew Delhi 3 Secretary Department of Power 55 Bhawan IInd Floor New Delhi 4 Secretary Ministry of Environment amp Forests 4th Floor Room No- 40405
Paryavaran Bhawan CGO Complex New Delhi 5 Secretary Ministry of Tribal Affairs Room No 73S A-Wing Shastri Bhawan
New Delhi 6 Secretary Department of Agriculture amp Cooperation Room No 126 Krishi
Bhawan New Delhi 7 Director General ICAR Room No-lOS Krishi Bhawan New Delhi S Chairman CEA Sewa Bhawan R K Puram New Delhi 9 Chairman Central Ground Water Board Jam Nagar House Man
Singh Road New Delhi 10 Principal Adviser (WR) Planning Commission Room No-255 Yojana Bhawan
Ilew Delh i 11 Principal Adviser (Power) Planning Commission Room No-107 Yojana Bhawan
New Delhi 12 Financial Adviser Ministry of Water Resources Room No-401 55 Bhawan Ilew
Delhi
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
Special Invitees
13 Member (WPampP) CWC New Delhi 14 Member (DampR) CWC New Delhi 15 Member (RM) CWC New Delhi 16 Chairman GFCC Sinchai Bhawan Patna - 800 015 Bihar 17 Commissioner (Projects) Room No-411 55 Bhawan MoWR New Delhi 18 Commissioner (Ganga) l1inistry of Water Resources CGO Complex New Delhi 19 Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure Ministry of Finance Lok Nayak
Bhawan New Delhi 20 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Uttar Pradesh
Sachivalay Annexe Lucknow-226 001 (UP) 21 Principal Secretary Water Resources Govt of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalaya
Arera Hills Bhopal 22 Principal Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Rajasthan Secretariat
Jaipur-302 005 23 Principal Secretary Irrigation amp CAD Department Government of Andhra Pradesh
Room No 716 7th floor J-Block Secretariat Building Hyderabad-SOO 022 24 Secretary Irrigation Department Government of Maharashtra Mantralaya
Mumbai-400 032 25 Secretary Water Resources amp Energy Department Government of Jharkhand
Nepal House Ranchi-834 001 (Jharkhand) 6th26 Secretary Irrigation Department Govt of Karnataka MS Building floor
Karnataka Government Secretariat Dr Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-S60 001 27 Chief Engineer (PI10) CWC New Delhi 28 ChiEf Engineer (FMO) CWC New Delhi 29 Chief Engineer Lower Ganga Basin WC 177-B Srikrishnapuri Patna-800 001 30 Chief Engineer Monitoring Central CWC Nagpur 31 Chief Engineer Monitoring South CWC Bangalore 32 Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad 33 Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal 34 Chief Enginbeer Yamuna Basin Orgainsation CWC Kalindi Bhawan New Delhi
Copy for information to 35 Sr PPS to Secretary Ministry of Water Resources New Delhi
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
SUMMARY RECORD OF DISCUSSIONS OF THE 10ih MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION FLOOD CONTROL AND MULTI PURPOSE PROJECTS HELD ON 27th OCTOBER 2010 FOR CONSIDERATION OF TECHNOshyECONOMIC VIABILITY OF PROJECT PROPOSALS
The 107h meeting of the Advisory Committee for consideration of TechnoshyEconomic viability of Irrigation Flood Control and Multi-purpose Project proposals was held on 27102010 at 1500 Hrs in the Conference Room of Central Water Commission Sewa Bhawan RK Puram New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Shri UN Panjiar Secretary (WR) List of participants is enclosed at Annexure-I
At the outset Chairman welcomed the Members of the Committee and other Officers present in the meeting Thereafter the Chairman requesteg the MembershySecretary to take up the agenda for discussion Proceedings of the meeting followed as under
I) CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE 10STH MEETING
The Summary Record of Discussions of the 106th Advisory Committee meeting was circulated vide Letter NO16272010-PA (N)1939-64 dated 4102010 MembershySecretary informed the Committee that no comments on the same have since been received The Committee confirmed the Summary Record of discussions of the 106th
Advisory Committee meeting
II) PROJECT PROPOSALS CONSIDERED BY THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
10 INDIRA SAGAR (POLAVARAM) PROJECT AP (REVISED-MAJOR)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Sagar (Polavaram)
Project envisages construction of a dam across the river Godavari at a village near
Polavaram in West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh The project is contemplated as a
Multipurpose Project conferring annual irrigation to an extent of 436 lakh ha in upland
areas of four districts of Andhra Pradesh namely East Godavari Vishakapatnam West
Godavari and Krishna water supply to Vishakhapatnam Steel Plant and industries in and
around Vishakhapatnam besides domestic water supply to enroute towns and villages
diversion of 80 TMC of water to Krishna basin and generation of hydropower with installed
capacity of 960 MW
The said proposal was earlier considered by the advisory committee in its 95th
meeting held on 2001 2009 and was accepted for Rs1 015104 crore at 2005-06 Price
Level Planning commission accorded investment clearance to the proposal on
25022009 for Rs 1015104 crore The State Govt has now submitted the Revised Cost
Estimate at 2010-11 price level without change in scope Revision was necessary due to
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
price escalation and change in the design of the Spillway and Earth amp Rockfill Dam The
Revised Estimate has been appraised in CWC and the cost has been finalized for Rs
1601045 crore at 2010-11 price level The BC ratio of the project is 170 State Finance
Concurrence has been obtained from the State Government
Advisor (Cost) raised query whether the phasing of expenditure as proposed by the
State Govt is feasible The Principal Secretary Govt of Andhra Pradesh replied that
the pace of work of the project was slow during the initial stage due to delay in obtaining
requisite statutory clearances from MoEF and MoTA He further informed that now all the
requisite statutory clearances have already been obtained and confirmed that the project
would be completed as per the proposed phasing
Joint Secretary (Exp) Deptt Of Expenditure suggested that in view of the letter
dated 26102010 of JS ampFA (MoWR) copies of DPR of the project should be sent to the
Office of Chief Advisor (Cost) Department of Expenditure and IFD MoWR for their
observations before considering the proposal Further she also stated that the subject is
sub-judice in the Honble Supreme Court Member (WPampP) explained that there is no stay
on implementation of the project and the Advisory Committee is considering only the
techno-economic viability of the project in respect of the revised cost However on the
suggestion of Joint Secretary (Exp) the committee decided to defer the project proposal
for next meeting and directed the Member Secretary to send copies of DPR to IFD and
Chief Advisor (Cost) for their reference
20 RAISA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW MEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The project envisages
construction of a dam near village Gitimeretoli under Bundu Block of Khunti Sub-division
in Ranchi district across River Raisa which is a left bank tributary of Kanchi river in
Subarnrekha basin The project will provide annual irrigation of 3145 ha (1887 ha Kharif
and 1258 ha Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 3145 ha lying on the both banks of the river
in Bundu Block of Ranchi district The project would benefit the tribal people of Ranchi
district
The project has been appraised in CWC and the cost of the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore (at PL 2009-10) The BC ratio of the project is 127 The
project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand has already accorded its administrative
approval to this project for Rs 6778 crore(at PL 2008-09) Now the project has been
finalized for Rs 7768 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since the increase in cost is less than 20
2
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
fresh administrative approvalState Finance Concurrence is not required as per the Govt
of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated 18122001
Advisor (Cost) informed that the provisions under Establishment Tools amp Plants
and Audit amp Accounts were kept nil in the estimate and therefore the cost estimate does
not appear to be realistic It was informed by project authorities that the provisions under
Establishment etc were kept nil keeping in view very small size of the project to be
executed departmentally The salary etc would be booked under non-plan head
Secretary 0NR) observed that the provisions under Establishment Tools ampPlants
and Audit amp Accounts etc ought to be kept so as to reflect the actual cost estimate of the
project for establishing its econornic viability Member (WPampP) asked projsct authorities to
submit the revised cost abstract incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and
the BC ratio be worked out accordingly
The Project Authorities submitted the Revised Cost amounting to Rs 8111 crore
incorporating provisions under aforesaid subheads and the revised BC ratio as 117
Since the project would benefit the tribal area the project proposal was accepted
30 TAJNA RESERVOIR SCHEME JHARKHAND (NEW-MEDIUM)
CE (PAD) CWC gave a brief introduction of the project The project envisages
construction of an earthen dam near village Gutjora under Khunti Block in Khunti district
across river Tajna which is a left bank tributary of Subarnrekha river in Subarnrekha
basin The project will provide Annual Irrigation of 5670 ha (4050 ha Kharif and 1620 ha
Rabi) spread over in a CCA of 6370 ha lying on the both bank of the river in Khunti
block
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore at 2009-10
price level with BC ratio of 234 The project authority informed that Govt of Jharkhand
has already accorded its administrative approval to this project for Rs 7442 crore at 2008
price level Now the project has been finalized for Rs 8776 crore(at PL 2009-10) Since
the increase in cost is less than 20 fresh administrative approvalState Finance
Concurrence is not required as per the Govt of Jharkhand Gazette notification dated
18122001
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
3
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
40 SUBERNAREKHA MULTIPURPOSE PROJECT JHARKHAND (REVISEDshyMAJOR)
CE (PAO) stated that the Subernarekha Multi-purpose Project Jharkhand was
discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting
after discussions Committee deferred the proposal on account of non-submission of the
following documents
(i) Clearance for diversion of 14526 ha of reserve forest land falling under Dalma Wildlife Sanctuary and
(ii) State Finance Concurrence
Accordingly the representatives of the State Government were asked to submit the
same within a month so that the proposal can be considered in the next meeting
In regard to condition (i) MoEF in his letter dated 2382006 communicating 1s1
stage forest clearance has given forest clearance for 165555 ha against requirement of
180081 ha It has been stated in the said letter that the diversion of 14526 ha of forest
land falling in Dalma wildlife sanctuary will be considered after receipt of compliance of
various conditions stipulated by the Standing Committee of National Board of Wildlife
(NBWL) as directed by the Honble Supreme Court
Accordingly the Government of Jharkhand complied the conditions of the Standing
Committee and recommended the proposal to MoEF for clearance vide letter dated
4102010 Further the State Wild Life Board under the chairmanship of Honble Chief
Minister also recommended the case for clearance of the said forest land in the meeting
held on 7102010 and State Govt sent the case to MoEF vide their letter dated
20102010 State Finance Concurrence has been obtained from the state Government of
Iharkhand
After brief discussion the committee considered that the project proposal is sound
and fit to be accepted techno-economically once the wild life clearance is obtained
Therefore the Committee decided that the project proposal may be considered for
acceptance after receipt of MOEF clearance in respect of 14526 ha of forest land falling
in the Dalma Wild life sanctuary The project was deferred only on the ground of nonshy
availability of wild life clearance and the Project Authorities were asked to expedite the
said clearance
4
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
50 KACHHAL MEDIUM)
MEDIUM IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEW -
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Kachhal Medium
Irrigation project envisages construction of 3150 m long earthen dam across river
Kachhal a tributary of Choti Kalisindh river in Chambal Basin The proposed project is
located in Shajapur district of MP and is planned to irrigate annually an area of 3470 ha
benefiting 18 villages of Badod block of Shajapur district in DPAP area
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 624789 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 102 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- II)
The committee observed that since BC ratio of the project is marginally more than
one as applicable for DPAP area detailed scrutiny of the project is required Chief
Engineer (NBO) CWC informed that BC ratio has been revised based on the latest
approved rate of soyabean obtained from the State Agriculture Department recently
Based on the latest rate the BC ratio stands revised to 145 which is considerably more
than 1 He also mentioned that since the project benefits DPAP area of Badod block the
project can therefore be accepted The revised calculations were placed before the
Committee which was accepted after discussion The representative of Mlo Finance
enquired to know about the steps proposed to be taken by the project authorities for
resettlement and rehabilitation of Project Affected People (PAP) The Principal
Secretary Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained thatin the instant case only one village will
be affected Accordingly resettlement of PAP of this village would be done as per
guidelines of Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
60 UPPER KAKETO IRRIGATION PROJECT MADHYA PRADESH (NEWshyMEDIUM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposed Upper Kaketo
Medium Irrigation project envisages construction of 3672 m long earthen dam across river
Parwati a tributary of Sindh in Yamuna river Basin in Sheopur and Shivpuri districts of
Madhya Pradesh The project is proposed as augmentation storage scheme to provide
storage augmentation to existing Tigra reservoir so that 3046 MCM drinking water
requirements of Gwalior city are adequately met The annual irrigation proposed from the
5
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
project is 3423 hectare in 600 ha of independent command of Upper Kaketo and 2823 ha
in existing command area of Tigra canal system
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 196266 crore (at 2009
Price Level) and BC ratio is 154 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- III)
The committee observed that the project provides drinking water benefits as a
major benefit while irrigation is proposed through existing canal system of the Tigra dam
Joint Secretary (Exp) raised query on the issue of tribal families being affected by the
project Principal Secretary (WRD) Govt of Madhya Pradesh explained that only 115
families belonging to scheduled tribe category are being affected due to project As per
Mlo Tribal Affairs guidelines since the number of scheduled tribe families are less than
200 the clearance from Mlo Tribal Affairs is not required Further that the resettlement of
PAPs of eight villages being affected by the project will be done as per guidelines of
Madhya Pradesh State Rehabilitation Policy (Revised) 2007
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
70 LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT (REVISED-MAJOR) MAHARASHTRA
CE (PAO) cwe briefly introduced the project The Revised Lower Wardha
Project Maharashtra was discussed in the 106TH TAC Meeting of MoWR held on
16092010 In this meeting the Committee decided that the project will be reconsidered
after submission of proper justification note by the project authoritieslState Govt for
increasing the scope of the project
Acq()rdingly the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 2092010 have
submitted the justiflcation note (Annexure-IV) which inter-alia contains the componentshy
wise justification as under
1 Inclusion of Lift irrigation scheme in the project to provide irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for the Project Affected People (PAP) resettled near the reservoir
2 Inclusion of Pulgaon Barrage for supply of drinking water to Pulgaon City along with 13 villages Damangaon City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon
3 Inclusion of Kharda Barrage to provide irrigation benefits to the farmers belonging to the distressed farmers suicide prone district
6
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
In addition the project authorities also mentioned in the above letter that tenders
for the above works have been invited and the maximum works have been awarded and
the project would be completed within time and with minimum cost over-run Further they
have mentioned that the project is under Honble PMs package for agrarian distressed
districts of Maharashtra
-Subsequent upon discussion on the justification note and on the advice of JS
(Exp) the project proposal was deferred by the Committee and the project authorities
were asked to submit additional justification in respect of cost and timepver- run based
on internal audit of accounts for the project
80 RELINING OF INDIRA GANDHI MAIN CANAL (STAGE-I) RAJASTHAN (NEWshyERM)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The Indira Gandhi Nahar Project
(Stage-I) is an old completed project constructed during the year 1958-1962 The canal
system of the project was originally constructed to irrigate an area of 553 lakh ha The
project provides irrigation facility and drinking water to the areas located in the districts of
Sri Ganga Nagar Hanumangarh and a part of Bikaner
The present proposal envisages relining of Indira Gandhi Feeder (traversing
through Haryana and Rajasthan) for a length of 5354 km and main canal in a reach of 61
km About 15106 Million Cubic feet (479 cusec) of water being saved due to Relining of
5334 km long Indira Gandhi Feeder Canal (between RD 496 to 671) including Haryana
Portion (Le RD496 to 555) and 61 km long Indira Gandhi Main Canal (between RD 000
to 20000) would provide additional irrigation to 71892 ha in the eXisting command area
of Rajasthan The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 40163 crore (at
March 2010 Price Level) and BC ratio is 236
Chairman inquired about the quantity of water being saved due to lining of canals
The project authorities replied that 6 cusecmillion sqft would be saved due to lining The
representative from CGWB suggested for installation of observation wellspiezometers so
as to monitor ground water table in the command area in the post project stage The
project authorities informed that a committee would be constituted by the State
Government for the purpose
7
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
The representative from Ministry of Finance inquired about the average plant
protection cost adopted while calculating the BC ratio and also queried about the
cropping pattern adopted for the project After a brief discussion the project authorities
were suggested to recalculate the BC ratio considering modified cropping pattern and
crop wise plant protection cost
The project authorities submitted the revised BC ratio calculation incorporating the
crop wise plant protection cost in line with the modified cropping pattern The revised
BCratio worked out as 225 was found acceptable
Since the State Finance Concurrence has not been obtained it was decided that
the proposal may be differed for re-consideration in the next meeting
90 INDIRA GANDHI NAHAR PROJECT (STAGE-II) RAJASTHAN (RevisedshyMajor)
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project Indira Gandhi Nahar Project stageshy
II envisages construction of 256 km long main canal starting from km 189 (downstream
end of Stage I ) to tail end of the Main Canal at km 445 and its distribution system which
includes construction of about 3835 km long branch canals distributaries and minors to
irrigate CCA of 802 lakh ha by gravity flow on the right side and about 1985 Km long
branch canals distributaries and minors to irrigate CCA of 442 lakh ha through six lift
systems (maximum lift 60 m) on the left side to provide annual irrigation of 901 lakh ha in
drought prone districts of Sriganganagar part of Bikaner Churu Jodhpur and Jaisalmer
of Rajasthan
The Revised cost estimate of Indira Gandhi Nahar Project Stage II for RS339891
cr (at 1992 price level) was earlier accepted by the Technical Advisory committee in its
65th meeting held on 14061996 Planning Commission has also accorded investment
clearance to the proposal in March 1998 for 339891 Crore (1992 price level)
The State Govt has now submitted Revised Cost Estimate at 2010 price level
without change in scope The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for
RS692132 crore (at 2010 price level) with BC ratio of 185 State Finance Concurrence
has been submitted by the Project Authorities
The expenditure incurred up to March 2010 is RS3990 cr Advisor (Cost) obseNed
that 84 of potential has already been created and queried why additional amount of Rs
8
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
293155 cr is required to create balance potential of only 16 The project authorities
informed that 84 of the potential created as indicated in the DPR is the area for which
irrigation facilities have been created due to construction of mainbranch canals etc but
whole of this area cannot be irrigated unless minorswater courses are complete The
actual area under irrigation up to end of 2010 is 454 lakh ha which is about 50 of the
proposed annual irrigation
Secretary (WR) suggested that the cost of pressure pipes etc be kept under the
sub-head V-water courses He further suggested that the cost of the sprinkler system etc
to be installed by the farmers should also be taken into consideration while working out
BC ratio of the project proposal
He further enquired about the electricity charges considered for lifting of water
The project authorities informed that Rs120per unit was considered for electricity
charges after deducting subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan Secretary (WR)
suggested that BC ratio be worked out considering the market rate for electricity charges
levied fo(lift system excluding the subsidy by the Government of Rajasthan
The project authorities submitted modified abstract of the cost estimate along with
computations for BC ratio taking into consideration above observations of Secretary
(WR) The BC ratio now worked out is 169 Since this requires to be examined again
after brief discussions the committee deferred this proposal for consideration in the next
meeting
10 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG BANKS OF RIVER TUNGA AT SHIMOGA TOWN FROM CH 11754 KM TO CH 14410 KM AND MATTUR VILLAGE FROM CH 6006KM TO CH 7036 KM IN SHIMOGA DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of counterfort retaining wall in River Tunga on right bank at Mattur Village for
a length of 103 km and on left bank at Shimoga Town for a length of 2646 km The
proposed works would minimize inundation of village of Mattur (an old Vedic village) and
town of Shimoga and would result in saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the
extent of Rs 1321 Crore and provide protection to the life and properties of 40000
people of Mattur Village and Shimoga Town The proposed scheme would benefit an
area of 11 ha of residential and commercial land in Mattur and Shimoga
9
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 5518 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 150 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure-V)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
11 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS FOR HEMAVATHI RIVER (CH km 2950 - km 3150) AT HOLENRASIPUR IN HASSAN DISTRICT OF KARNATAKA STATE
CE (PAO) CWC briefly introduced the project The proposal envisages
construction of a counter fort retaining walls in river Hemavathi middot on right bank at cO
Holenarsipur town for a length of 20 km in Hassan district of Karnataka State The
proposed works would minimize inundation of town of Holenarsipur and would result in
saving of annual damage to the infrastructures to the extent of RS6991 crore and would
provide protection to the life and properties of the people of Holenarsipur town The
propos~d scheme would benefit an area of 7 ha residential and commercial land and
population of about 20000
The Cost Estimate of the project has been finalized for Rs 2548 crore (at 2010-11
Price Level) and BC ratio is 171 State Finance Concurrence has been submitted by the
Project Authorities (Annexure- VI)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
120 FLOOD PROTECTION WORKS ALONG LEFT AND RIGHT BANK OF RIVER RAPTI IN DISTRICT SIDDHARTHNAGAR SANT KABIR NAGAR GORAKHPUR amp DEORIA UP
CE (PAO) CWC mentioned that the Scheme was earlier discussed in the 106TH
TAC Meeting of MoWR held on 16092010 and was deferred for want of State Finance
Concurrence for the finalized cost of Rs 5229 Crore (PL 2009-10)
Now the project authorities have submitted State Finance Concurrence (SFC) for
the finalized cost of the project from Govt of Uttar Pradesh (Annexure- VII)
After brief discussions the committee accepted the proposal
The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair
10
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
8
Annexure-I
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Members of the Committee
Sf Shri 1 U N Panjiar Secretary (WR) Ministry of Water Resources In the Chair
2 Smt AC Duggal Joint Secretary (Expenditure) (Representing Member Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance)
3 Avinash Mishra Dy Advisor (WR) (Representing Advisor Member Planning Commission)
4 Tanmoy Das Chief engineer CEA (Representing Ministry of Member Power and Central Electricity Authority)
5 Dr Poonam Sharma Scientist - 0 (Representing Central Ground Member Water Board)
6 Dr Maan Singh DAC (Representing Ministry ofAgriculture) Member
7 S K Shrivastava Chief Engineer PAO ewc New Delhi Member- Secretary
Special Invitees
a) Ministry of Finance
Shri P K Aggarwal Advisor (Cost) (Representing Chief Advisor Cost Ministry of Finance)
b) Ministry ofwater Resources
9 Shri A 8 Pandya Commissioner (Projects) MoWR New Delhi
c) Central Water Commission
Sf Shri
10 R C Jha Member (WPampP)amp Member (RM) CWC New Delhi
11 OP Khanda Chief Engineer YBO CWC New Delhi
12 KN Keshri Chief Engineer LGBOCWC Patna
13 VN Wakpanjar Chief Engineer KGBO CWC Hyderabad
14 MK Sinha Chief Engineer PMO CWC New Delhi
15 YK Sharma Chief Engineer lBO CWC Chandigarh
16 SKG Panclit Chief Engineer NBO CWC Bhopal
17 SK Haldar Director (Mon) CWC Bhopal
18 DP Mathuria Director (MampA) CWC Bhopal
19 GThakur Director CA(I) CWC New Delhi
20 Ajay Kumar Director PA (N) CWC New Delhi
21 PC Jha Director PA (C) CWC New Delhi
11
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
22 RK Kanodia Director PA (S) CWC New Delhi
23 C Lal Director FMP CWC New Delhi
24 GS Tyagi Director (UT amp SS) CWC New Delhi
25 SS Bakshi Director (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
26 M W Paunikar DO PA(N) CWC New Delhi
27 Sudhir Kumar DO PA(S) CWC New Delhi
28 Bashishtha Rai DO PA(C) CWC New Delhi
29 OP Gupta DO (FEamp SA) CWC New Delhi
d) State Government officers
SI Shri
Andhra Pradesh
30 SK Joshi Principal Secretary I ampCAD Dptt Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyoerabad
31 M Venkateswara Rao Chief Engineer Indira Sagar Polavaram Project Dowlaiswarm AP
32 KRamakrishna Chief Engineer Govtof Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad
Jharkhand
33 RS Poddar Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
34 BC Nigam Spl Secretary WRD Govt of Jharkhand Ranchi
35 RMRabidas Engineer-in-Chief WRD Govt of ~Iharkhand Ranchi
36 BMKumar Chief Engineer WRD Govt of Jharkhand Jamshedpur
37 BKSingh SE WRD Govt of Jharkhand~ Ranchi
38 Amaresh Kumar Sinha Resident Engineer cum OSD WRD Govt of Jharkhand New Delhi
Karnataka
39 B Guru Prasad Chief Engineer Minor Irrigation Govt of Karnataka Bangalore
Madhya Pradesh
40 R S Julaniya Principal Secretary WRD Govt of Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
41 EB Pati SecretaryWRD Govt of Maharashtra Mumbai
42 SNHuddar Advisor WRD Govt of Maharashtra Pune
43 CS Modak Executive Director VIDC Nagpur
NBGhuge Chief Engineer Gosikhurd Project Nagpur
44 Rajasthan
45 Damodar Sharma Chairman IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Jaipur
46 TK Parmar Chief Engineer WR (North) Govt of Rajasthan Hanumangarh
47 Virdhi Chand Chief Engineer IGNP Govtof Rajasthan Bikaner
48 Rajni kant SE Suratgarh WRCircie Hanumangarh
Uttar Pradesh
49 Suresh Tiwari Engineer-in-Chief (DampP) Irrigation Department Govtof UP Lucknow
50 A K Ojha CE UP Irrigation Govtof UP Lucknow
12
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
T tzrnit IT fiTTH1
~~ ~I1P1 ~
1fII1tCh gj-11 13441173 105 1gtI Jl ll n Fcr Iii 131 0 r)- ( ~ ftrrfli 2 G 11012010
gtlA 1fCltnJntrziffi ~ -mwfif1 J~~T1 ~T1 ~ J117lTrT ~~I
Iqqq- ~ 11UT1 ~ qf~~ f~ ~Wif[f (1f~i) ~ ~ 1]clrl ~ ~1 P1
ltfl~ Ofl~ I
ltnrnZ1middotlftlrIl fn-~ qf4111 11 ~ ~n~ (mzrn~1) ~ ~fitf~B rITTfl ~ 6247 4lt- CHrdl ~ h~ ~ ~ ~~I ~mr-I ~ ~ I f
yen ~lO )10
C(1)~tw=I ~Rltn) ~tIfIq
ql~~1 ~ITB1 iiftf mn~ ~
~ ~3441173 05 Q -31f n fltUt31IQLI] Wrr~r ~ ~amp lO~OlO ~-
1 BfI ~ n-mtFf ffiwl 1TITrf (-Tiff ~ ~ 1ltf~ rn lilll 1 ~1-110028 2 ~~P-l ~( Vf1 3wW1 qtt)qm ~fcA 1tG ~ ~
wv5--~
~~ Tjlt~~l ~TTfR Jfff Hmlfil frqrl
V - h H A t l l ~ I oKt lr rT( It ~o IO rln~
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
A -liN f5 X L 10 ~- TIl
P~ 31f7-1589081131 Jo-y f
l1~lm~lT ~ I
iJ1~ mwR ~PT ~ffi11
~ R1lcn 261012010
11Yl ~r~ ~ -Jj)TlfJf7 -3rrirm~~A
~ vwr 3W1l1
~~I
fm- Jffi ~ 11-ltr1
(~fc1 ~ I
ffiql~ 11~R-A1 fvrrn TCnIfltf (11~~I) qjl ~I ~ 1i r~ffit ~
middot3m WI l[tzr f~ qf~ ~ ~ (qvrW~l) ~ TfMm illll1
~ 19626 ltf19 3ffift ~ ltfit ~ ~ q~~T Qll1R ~ rft9fltf f I~~~ i)
j bull (lq~ltfl11 TTT11ltn)
~ BfircI
tj unR~1 ~1TIf1 ~ Gm18 if1Pl
~ ~ Jffi-15S9 08Q311 Io-43 ~~ ~C 102010 ~M- 1 -rifT iff ~~ 1111 ~ ~fl1 ~1flt)~ ~ tl Qri ~ Wi-ll0028
2 W~T9i ~-i)l ~ middotjwnrr 7nITB ljqf m ~ ~
~-~ 1fuCl
1iurnt~T ~ ~ mntr1 fcr+wl
~VJ nR~r
I I~
i Leuro (~i~L- co ----- - ---~ pt ~ -
16loUO
~t c0-kt5)
birmiddot (gt k((Jl)-1 ~ -shy
I Lf
ld 5pound029L2SSL0 01 WOJj 2S2t 0102-92-1)0
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
ANIV E XUI F - rv ---~- - - -
JUSTIFICATION
FOR
INCREASING THE SCOPE OF THE
LOWER WARDHA IRRIGATION PROJECT MAHARASHIRA
(REVISED-MAJOR)
Imiddot
i
(
J S
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
The F1evised Lower Wardha Project Maharashtra wa~ discussed in the 106lh TAC Meeting of
MoWR held on 16092010 In the said meeting after discussions regarding the benefits
accrued by the present proposal against the originally approved project proposal the
Committee dpcidecl that the project will be reconsidered after submission of proper justification
note for chan~Jing the scope of the project by project authorities
In thi s regard the Government of Maharashtra vide letter dated 20 92010 addre ssed to
Secretary (MoWR) with a copy endorsed to Chairman CWC have submitted justification which
13 enclosed at Annex-I
The component-wise justification as stated by the project authorities are given as here under
1 Lift Component The Lift irrigation scheme in the project has been proposed to provide
irrigation benefits to an additional area of 8330 ha annually for which sufficjent water is
available With the provision of Lift irrigation benefits can be given to some extent to the
Project Affected People At present the work of Head works is under completion it is
feasible at this stage to construct the lift component as a part of Lower Wardha Project rather
than taking the scheme separately
2 Pulgaon Barrage In earlier proposal supply of water for drinking purpose to Pulgaon City
had been proposed from the Lower Wardha Reservoir Now in the revised proposal it has
been proposed to supply drinking water to Pulgaon City with 13 villages Damangaoll
City and Central Ammunition Depot located at Pulgaon from the Pulgaon Barrage
located at 27 Kl DIS of the Lower Wardha Project With such proposal the water losses
due to transmission from Lower Wardha Dam and Cost of the water carriage system would
be reduceej significantly Also the water from free catchment downstream of Lower Wardha
Project would also be utilized The water thus saved would be supplied to Lanco Power
project which adds net revenue to the Government and reduces the Power scarcity in
the state
3 Kharda Barrage The barrage has been proposed at 62 Km DIS of the Lower Wardha
Project to provide additional irrigation benefits to an area of 2464 ha annually Though this
area comes in culturable command of the project topographicqlly it is located at higher
elevation due to which the irrigation benefits cannot be provi~e through the distribution
network of the originally conceived Lower Wardha Project The propos~d fltharda Barrage is
located near by the above command area Therefore this area would tiJe brought under
irrigation by the proposed Kharda barrage The benefited area belongs to the distressed
farmers suicide prone district Further water from free catchment below is also utilized
thus increasing the utilization of water
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
---
Apart from the above the project authorities have mentioned that framing the above project
propo~)al fer the said components separately would consume much time for the preparation
ot detailed project reports At the same tii-le the actual intended benefits from the original
Lower Wai-dha project would not be affected due to inclusion of Lift Irrigation Scheme and
other two 13arrages However the original components of the project will be given priority to
complete first and to give irrigation benefits accordingly The additional components
proposed will be planned in such a way that the completion of original components should
not be affected The detailed programme of the various components of the project is as given
below - --_
-S~ParticuI8-r Progress
-~~------shy 1001 I Head works I
I
i i
_---shy -~---- lal tg7 - shy
_1-_rain ca 1001~~1JD~~3Jttries 20
------- - -shy0t S~-t-w-orkS of LIS
0l (i~ IBarage~ --~---
As per the schedule bull proposed earlier
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be completed by 2010
Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Comf2leted Proposed to be completed by 2014 Proposed to be completed by 2015 Proposed to be completed by 2014
As per the schedule revised now - ~j
All the civil work is completed and Miscellaneous work of gate erection balance is in progress to be comf2leted by 2010 ___ _ Main canal works are proposed to be completed by 2011 Completed Proposed to be completed by 2012 Proposed to be completed by 201 5 Proposed to be completed by 2014 --
The project authorities have also mentioned that tenders for the above works have been invited
and the maximum works have been awarded so that the project would be completed within
time and minimum cost over-run
(ov1 of Mahmashtra has _also given concurrence of Finance Oeptt for the finalized cost of the
revised Lower Wardha project
Iurther they have mentioned that the project IS under Honble PMs package for agrarian
distressed districts of iVlaharashtra
In view of the above justification furnished -by Government of Maharashtra the revised proi(~ct
proposal is put up for consideration of the Ijvisory Committee please
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
~
j( 11 ill 1 11
(
he I 11
i1~)1 n
1 1
1)11 III I) i ]IIW)1 dtle1
II
middot
1 i
--shy
1011]
T
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
IITI lUll
C0I11101ICI11 1OP( the silPldd llut
maxinllllll wi lhi 11 Ii me minim lIllJ cost
nance DcptLmiddot Ihe t1 cost
Lower Varclha a~
W
(tl Y Kobnyulc) (K U HatH)
bull llthc Dircdol ~cuda Iy (Wl) v rhha Irriglltion J)ccllJpnl~t Water lcsomcdDqlarhW211 t
rporation Nagplll G(ycrtimcnt hI Mahra~htra MI~ntralHya l1lhlbai
lu C c lK Pmam Nevv Delhimiddot
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
A
102010
is hereby
by the of Kamataka and
will for the project
r Resources) (Minor trrigation) Department
Bangalore
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
10 10
Concurrence of Finance
-1~ tp Government Water ResQunes Department
Minor irrigation) Finance Department ngalore ngalOre
(Budget and gtIOJ
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
fTr~ ~
3oJ0 fSI 1 3
~~m YfW -J7TJTrTT
YfW ~ lRT ~o pound~ ~~ qft qrf ~oo~-90 Gfl 9~o~~o90 cit i2J7-rr
=-ftamp HfltPbl ( ~=r
rT-r=T it ~Plff flrf)l r-fliiFrrfir
~~~~ ~~ ampc~~ ===~= e=ftrr =~~
3fTCr~z(ifi
~-lt3rJ1flr) i3oJl0 ~lTfFf ~ (middotrosqJ ~
JfTi(lZT itfiiKr ~ fcli ~=~ ~ Cfj( rT-r=T -r7+=
Cfir qrsc
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80
STATE FINANCE CONCURRENCE
Combined proect Estimate if 10 ns Flood Protection
Schemer Basin under Flood Management Programme in Districts
Siddharthnt~ar Jant Kabir Nagar Gorakhpur Deoria in UP
costing 5229 crore Submitted to Central Water Commission
New Delhi which has been evaluated ~ them for Rs 52~29 crore
State Concurrence Rs 5229 crore is heretJ accoreded for
the same
Engineer-in-Chief Design amp Planning
Lucknow
~ w~~ Principal Secretary Principal Secretary
Irrigation Govt ofuP Finanace ofuP Lucknow Lucknow
[-mail einc_dp(iliidurgovin CE-Galldak-ISAl80