PAKHTUNKHWA HYDEL DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION

GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA

300 MW BALAKOT HYDROPOWER PROJECT

FEASIBILITY STUDY REPORT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
December, 2013

Balakot Hydropower Consultants:

Mirza Associates Engineering Services (Pvt) Ltd.

ILF BeratendeIngenieure ZT GmbH, Austria

Berkeley Associates

Sub-Consultants:
ILF Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd. ESUPAK, UET, Lahore NCEG, Peshawar HEC Peshawar
300 MW Balakot Hydropower Project
Feasibility Study Report
Executive Summary

LIST OF VOLUMES

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
VOLUME - 1 MAIN REPORT
VOLUME - 2 DESIGN CRITERIA (CIVIL, ELECTRICAL, MECHANICAL)
VOLUME - 3 TOPOGRAPHIC AND HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY REPORT
VOLUME - 4 HYDROLOGY AND SEDIMENTATION STUDIES REPORT
Vol. 4-1/2 - Report
Vol. 4-2/2 - Annexure
VOLUME - 5 NEO-TECTONIC AND SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS
VOLUME - 6 GEOLOGICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL STUDIES

Vol. 6-1/6 - General

Vol. 6-2/6 - Dam Site and Inlet Structures
Vol. 6-3/6 - Dam Site (Annexure)
Vol. 6-4/6 - Headrace Tunnel
Vol. 6-5/6 - Powerhouse and Outlet Structures
Vol. 6-6/6 - Powerhouse (Annexure)
VOLUME - 7 DAM AND OTHER HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES
VOLUME - 8 POWER TRANSMISSION STUDIES
VOLUME - 9 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
REPORT
Vol. 9-1/2 - Report
Vol. 9-2/2 - Annexure
VOLUME - 10 PROJECT DRAWINGS
300 MW Balakot Hydropower Project
Feasibility Study Report
Executive Summary
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Sr. No Description Page No.

1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 1
2 TOPOGRAPHIC AND HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEYS ...................................... 3
3 HYDROLOGY AND SEDIMENTATION STUDIES ........................................... 4
4 NEO-TECTONIC AND SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSES .................................. 4
4.1 Seismic Design Parameters Based on Deterministic Seismic Hazard
Assessment (DSHA) Approach......................................................................... 5
4.2 Seismic Design Parameters Based On Probabilistic Seismic Hazard
Assessment (PSHA) Approach......................................................................... 5
5 GEOLOGICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL STUDIES ........................................... 5
6 DESIGN CRITERIA (CIVIL, ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL) .................... 6
7 PROJECT LAYOUT STUDIES......................................................................... 6
8 PROJECT SIZING AND POWER POTENTIAL STUDIES ............................... 7
9 DAM AND OTHER HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES ............................................ 8
9.1 Main Dam ......................................................................................................... 8
9.2 River Diversion Scheme ................................................................................... 8
9.3 Power Intake Structure ..................................................................................... 8
9.4 Low Pressure Headrace Tunnel ....................................................................... 8
9.5 Vertical Shaft .................................................................................................... 9
9.6 Pressure Tunnel ............................................................................................... 9
9.7 Tailrace Tunnel................................................................................................. 9
9.8 Head Losses in the Conduit System ................................................................. 9
9.9 Surge Tank....................................................................................................... 9
9.10 Power Complex ................................................................................................ 9
9.10.1 Multi Storied Transformer Cavern..................................................................... 9
9.10.2 Access Tunnel................................................................................................ 10
9.10.3 Cable and Ventilation Tunnel.......................................................................... 10
10 POWER TRANSMISSION AND INTERCONNECTION STUDIES.................. 10
11 COST ESTIMATES ........................................................................................ 12
12 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND CONSTRUCTION PLANNING ............ 12
13 ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS .................................................... 14
300 MW Balakot Hydropower Project
Feasibility Study Report
Executive Summary Page -1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1 INTRODUCTION
Balakot Hydropower Project (HPP) is one of the series of hydropower
development projects launched by PHYDO (Pakhtunkhwa Hydel Development
Organization), Government of Pakhtunkhwa (KP). The objective of the proposed
hydropower scheme is to generate and add cheap energy to the system in order
to meet the current shortfall and increasing demand of electricity in the region
through economical and sustainable means.
Montreal Engineering Company (MONENCO),a Canadian Consulting Engineering
Organization, identified three hydropower projects on Kunhar River, namely Naran,
Suki Kinari and Patrind in 1984. Balakot HPP was identified in 1995, under the
study Identification of Hydropower Potential in Kaghan Valley by Sarhad Hydel
Development Organization (SHYDO) with the technical collaboration of the
German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ) as a 190 MW HPP. The project
envisaged a 140 m high dam with a 4.5 km long intake tunnel and an
underground powerhouse. The dam axis was, identified 9 km upstream of Balakot
town, headrace tunnel on the left bank and the powerhouse near the confluence
of Sangarh nullah with Kunhar River.
PHYDO carried out ICB in 2011 for the selection of Consultant to carry out
detailed Feasibility Study of the Project. As a result of competitive bidding, the
Consortium of Consultants led by Mirza Associates Engineering Services (Pvt.)
Ltd. (MAES) and consisting of ILF Beratende Ingeniere ZT GmbH, Innsbruck,
Austria and Berkeley Associates, Pakistan, had been selected for implementation
of the Feasibility Study of Balakot HPP. The Consultants carried out services for
eighteen months and prepared this bankable Feasibility Study Report of the
Project.
The Study has resulted in a project size of 300 MW with an excellent economic
rate of return. Table -1 presents the salient features of the Project. Balakot dam
and powerhouse have been proposed on the 9 km stretch of the intermediate part
of 20 km reach of Kunhar River from Paras to Sangarh Village. The dam site on
Kunhar River is 03 kilometer downstream of Paras village, and 17 km upstream of
Balakot town main bridge. The powerhouse is to be located on the left bank of
Sangarh nullah confluence with Kunhar River, 1 km upstream of Dabrain village
and 8 km upstream of Balakot main bridge. The whole project layout including the
headrace tunnel is proposed on the left bank of Kunhar River. (Drawing BLK-CS-
GEN-DWG-001).
Table - 1: Salient Features of the Project
HYDROLOGY (DESIGN FLOWS)
Catchment area at dam site 1952 km2
Mean annual flows 87.3 m3/s
Design discharge 154 m3/s
Design flood (10,000 Year Flood) 5312 m3/s
Probable maximum flood 5702 m3/s
Maximum flood level 1290 m.a.s.l
300 MW Balakot Hydropower Project
Feasibility Study Report
Executive Summary Page -2

RESERVOIR
Reservoir length 4,500 m
Reservoir area 0.555 km2
Max. reservoir operating level 1288 m.a.s.l
Min. reservoir operating level 1283 m.a.s.l
Reservoir capacity at 1288 m.a.s.l 12.606 MCM
Reservoir capacity at 1283 m.a.s.l 10.040 MCM
DAM STRUCTURE
Dam height above riverbed and Foundation level 78 m, 24 m
Dam crest level and length 1293 m.a.s.l, 250 m
Dam Type Concrete gravity
DIVERSION TUNNEL
Length of diversion tunnel 400 m
Size of tunnel (W x H) 10 x 12 m
SPILLWAY
Gated surface spillway
Number and type of gates 5 (Five), Radial gate
Gate Size 10.5 m x 12 m
Discharge capacity 5745 m3/s
Spillway crest / sill level 1276.0 m.a.s.l
LOW LEVEL OUTLETS/ FLUSHING SLUICES
No. of outlets 3 (Three)
Gate type Vertical lift gate
Gate size (W x H) 4x5m
Discharge capacity 1721 m3/s
Sill level of flushing sluices 1217.0 m a s l
POWER WATERWAYS
POWER INTAKE
Type Lateral intake
No. of gates 1 (one)
Gate size (W x H) 8x8m
Deck elevation 1293.0 m.a.s.l
Sill level of intake racks 1264.0 m.a.s.l
LOW PRESSURE HEADRACE TUNNEL
Diameter 8.0 m
Length 8420 m
SURGE SHAFT
Diameter 12 m
Height 80 m
300 MW Balakot Hydropower Project
Feasibility Study Report
Executive Summary Page -3

PRESSURE SHAFT (STEEL LINED)

Diameter 5.6 m
Length 200 m
PENSTOCKS
No. of penstocks 4 (Four)
Diameter 2.8 m
Total Length of 4 penstocks (20 m each) 80 m
POWER GENERATION
Gross head 240.1 m
Installed plant capacity 300 MW
Mean annual energy (average 51 years.) 1187.2 GWh
Plant factor 45.2 % (Average year)
Turbine type Francis, 333.33 rpm
No. of units 4 (Four)
No. of generators 4 (Four)
Underground cavern
Powerhouse type
type
Powerhouse size (L x W x H) (84 x 18 x 33.5) m
Transmission System Indoor GIS
Transmission Voltage 500 kV
TAILRACE TUNNEL
Diameter of tunnel 8.0 m
Length of tailrace tunnel 2075 m
COST ESTIMATES & ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
Estimated cost 645.275 Million US $
Discount rate 12 %
FIRR 6.44 %
Tariff 9.91 US Cents per kWh
B/C ratio 1.49
This Feasibility Study Report consists of a Main Report (Volume-1) and nine (9)
supporting volumes. The Main Report consists of eighteen (18) sections
completely covering all aspects of the Project at feasibility level, whereas the nine
(9) volumes present details of the studies, field data, drawings and other required
information related to different sections of the Main Report.
2 TOPOGRAPHIC AND HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEYS
For the preparation of a bankable Feasibility Study Report of international
standard, a comprehensive topographic survey program was established and
executed in the field by a qualified and experienced survey team of the
Consultants.
300 MW Balakot Hydropower Project
Feasibility Study Report
Executive Summary Page -4

The survey had been carried out in one uniform system of co-ordinates and
elevations using S.O.P. Benchmark at Batrasi as datum. All survey work was then
duly verified through GPS.
Following scales with contour interval of 2m have been adopted for the survey
maps of the project:
I. Reservoir area, Headrace Tunnel / Channels, Access Roads 1:2000
II. Dam Site and Intake Area 1:500
III. Surge Tank, Pressure Tunnel/Penstock,
Powerhouse and Tailrace 1:1000
IV. Project Layout 1:25,000
The terrestrial survey has been carried-out for the three (3) alternative project
layouts conceived and selected for field work at the Inception Stage and covers all
the above mentioned project components.
For the inaccessible areas of the tunnel alignments, topographic maps have been
developed with the help of high resolution Digital Elevation Models (DEM), ortho-
rectified with ground survey.
Hydrographic survey was carried out and longitudinal profiles of the relevant
stretch of Kunhar River were prepared.
3 HYDROLOGY AND SEDIMENTATION STUDIES
The Project has a catchment area of 1952 Km2 up to the dam site. Mean annual
flows estimated for the Garhi Habibullah stream gauging station, dam site and
powerhouse site are 102.3, 87.3 and 94.1cumecs, respectively.
The recommended flood magnitudes corresponding to 10,000 year return period
for the dam and powerhouse sites are computed as 5312 and 5745 cumecs,
respectively. The computed PMF at the dam site is 5702 cumecs.
Average annual total sediment inflow to the dam site is 2.714 MCM (2201 AF).
Average annual trapped sediment load at the dam site is 1.1 MCM (892 AF).
Optimum discharge to carryout efficient flushing of the reservoir is computed as
150 to 350 cumecs, with flushing duration of 11.25 to 2.5 days, depending on the
flow available and amount of deposited sediments. The life of the reservoir can be
enhanced to about 40 years with appropriate flushing operations once a year
during June or July, and annual monitoring of sediment delta. Construction of Suki
Kinari reservoir would further extend the life of Balakot reservoir from 40 to 50
years. Further enhancement in life of reservoir can be achieved, by adopting
appropriate watershed management measures.
Dam breach analyses for PMF shows that the generated flood peaks between the
dam and powerhouse sites indicate no chances of flooding of the downstream
settlements.
4 NEO-TECTONIC AND SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSES
The region encompassing the Balakot HPP is highly complex in terms of its
tectonic set up.
The estimated seismic hazards in terms of peak ground acceleration (PGA) with
10% probability of exceedance in 50 years i.e., 475 year return period as
300 MW Balakot Hydropower Project
Feasibility Study Report
Executive Summary Page -5

computed by different workers for Kaghan, range between 0.09 and 0.7 with the
recommended value as 0.38.
Kashmir Earthquake (2005) of M 7.6was the major event in Kaghan valley. This
earthquake generated very high isoseismal MMI intensities of XI at Balakot, while
intensities as high as VII were recorded near Naran and VI at Batakundi.
Based on the standard MMI to PGA conversion models, the intensities generated
by this earthquake yield PGAs of 0.8-0.9 for the project site.
4.1 Seismic Design Parameters Based on Deterministic Seismic Hazard
Assessment (DSHA) Approach
According to ICOLD (2010), DSHA is used for assessment of Maximum Credible
Earthquake (MCE), and PGA values for both 50-percentile (median) and 84-
percentile (mean plus one standard deviation) are listed.
For the dam site, at GMPE with 84-percentile value, seven of 12 identified faults
are capable of generating PGA >0.5g. The maximum PGA is expected from
Panjal Fault (Segment 4) that passes close to the dam site with a value of 0.71g.
For the powerhouse site, at GMPE with 84-percentile value, 5 of 12 faults
(Balakot-Bagh Fault, Panjal Fault VI, Kaghan Fault, Indus-Kohistan Seismic Zone,
and Combined Balakot-Bagh-Indus Kohistan Seismic Zone) generate PGAs >
0.7g,which is close to PGA generated by the Balakot-BaghFault in the M 7.6 2005
Kashmir Earthquake. Therefore, for the Project, MCE is defined by a ground
motion of 0.79g.
4.2 Seismic Design Parameters Based on Probabilistic Seismic Hazard
Assessment (PSHA) Approach
Ground motion parameters for return periods from 200 to 10,000 years for
appropriate selection as the MDE design parameters corresponding to PGAs of
0.24 to 0.74g for the dam and 0.24-0.73g for the powerhouse have been included.
However, considering the seismic history of the Balakot area, it is recommended
that the ground-motion parameters for the MDE may be selected for 1000 year
return period as a minimum and 10,000 year as the maximum.
The OBE may be expected to occur during the lifetime of the structure. No
damage or loss of service is allowed. It has a probability of occurrence of about 50%
during the service life of 100 years. The return period is taken as145 years
(ICOLD 2010). The OBE ground motion parameters are estimated based on
PSHA. For the Project 150 year return period has been recommended for
selection of the OBE ground-motion parameters, which corresponds to 0.24g for
the project.
5 GEOLOGICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL STUDIES
The field work for the Project comprised surface geological mapping including
scan line surveys, geophysical survey using seismic refraction method, drilling of
boreholes, coring and logging, performance of permeability and water pressure
tests and excavation of test pits at potential construction material sources.
A total of 20 scan line surveys and 7 profiles of seismic refraction survey, were
carried out at the dam/ intake area, headrace tunnel, powerhouse etc.
300 MW Balakot Hydropower Project
Feasibility Study Report
Executive Summary Page -6

For collection of the soil/ rock samples and to perform in-situ tests,22 boreholes
were drilled at the proposed structure locations, with total drilling depth of 2768 m.
Test pits were also excavated at various structure locations for verification of the
extent of overburden and physical inspection of its nature at the site. Some other
pits were excavated in prospective borrow areas for evaluation of the construction
materials i.e. coarse as well as fine aggregate, and cohesive material.
Suitability of the potential construction material sources has been examined
through laboratory testing of representative samples.
The project area is located in rocks belonging to Murree Formation of early
Miocene age, which consists of sandstone and siltstone, mudstone/shales and
lenses of conglomerates. These rocks are exposed at the dam and powerhouse
areas in alternate beds. Structurally, the formation shows a high degree of
compression in the form of tight folding with repeated faulting and fracturing.
On the basis of observed RQD values, the bedrock can be classified as Very
Poor to Excellent with a very wide range of core recovery from 0 % to 99 %.
In the light of data collected and analyses carried out, the rock mass design
parameters were determined for various components of the project, and used for
evaluating the stability as well as foundation design parameters for the various
structures. For the underground structures i.e. headrace tunnel, surge shaft,
powerhouse caverns and tailrace tunnel, stability analyses and design of support
systems have been carried out.
6 DESIGN CRITERIA (CIVIL, ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL)
A design criteria is necessary for setting out the guidelines/ basis of all designs
and field operations necessary for preparing the Feasibility Report. The design
criteria document for Civil, Electrical and Mechanical works has been prepared,
which covered all the aspects of design and field operations.
7 PROJECT LAYOUT STUDIES
The Consultants identified two alternative dam sites in addition to the previously
identified site by PHYDO/GTZ(Drawing BLK-GE-DWG-001).Based on the
parameters for screening viz: good topographical, hydrological and geological
conditions and minimal environmental issue etc, the dam site selected is located 2
km upstream of Kewai nullah confluence. At the selected dam site, the valley
sections are narrow at the upstream cofferdam, downstream cofferdam, diversion
tunnel, main dam, plunge pool and power intake area.
Two powerhouse sites (P-1B, P-1C) in addition to and in close vicinity of the site
identified by PHYDO/GTZ were investigated, which indicated poor geological
structure along the depth, and were rejected as unsuitable for underground
powerhouse. An alternative powerhouse site P-2 some 2.5 km upstream of
Sangarh village was found to have better geological structure for the surge tank,
pressure shaft and the underground powerhouse. Necessary investigations were
conducted to confirm the location of the underground structure at the powerhouse.
The selected layout has relatively smaller dam, longer tunnel and a reservoir with
adequate storage for daily peaking.
300 MW Balakot Hydropower Project
Feasibility Study Report
Executive Summary Page -7

8 PROJECT SIZING AND POWER POTENTIAL STUDIES

For the selected Project layout, project sizing i.e., optimization of the type of plant
and its capacity, fixing of maximum reservoir level and diameters of the headrace
tunnel and shaft have been performed.
The sizing/optimization of the plant and reservoir level was done using design
discharge values ranging from 90 to 194 cumecs at incremental intervals of
8cumecs. For each discharge, preliminary cost of the project was estimated and
power/ energy calculations were performed. Corresponding net present value
(NPV) calculations were also performed, and the highest NPV value was the
deciding factor of the sizing/optimization process.
For optimization of the diameters of headrace tunnel and pressure shaft, different
diameters were considered, and the construction cost for the total length of
tunnel/shaft calculated. Further, the cost of loss of energy due to hydraulic losses
was estimated. Then, both costs i.e. construction and energy losses costs were
summed up, and the diameter having the lowest sum of costs was taken as the
optimum.
The headrace tunnel and partially steel lined pressure shaft have been optimized
as 8.0m and 5.6m respectively.
For optimization of plant capacity run-of-the river and peaking options were
evaluated and sensitivity analysis performed. It was found that 4-hour peaking
with design discharge of 154 cumecs and plant capacity of 300 MW will be the
optimum. The maximum and minimum reservoir levels were optimized as 1288.0
and 1283.0 m.a.s.l.
With the above optimized reservoir levels, the power and energy estimations of
the project have been performed with the following basic assumptions:
a. The residual flows in the Kunhar River, during the low flow period, have
been taken as 1.50 cumecs in winter and 3.0 cumecs in summer.
b. For the design discharge available to the powerhouse, efficiencies of
91.0%, 97.0% and 99% have been used for the turbines, generators and
transformers respectively.
c. The head loss has been considered as 13.09 m to estimate net head at
the turbines for the discharge of 154 cumecs
d. Sediment flushing is to be carried out every year during the summer
months, when discharge is above 154 cumces.
e. During the low flow periods, the live storage is used to store water during
off peak hours to improve the flows for power generation in peak hours. It
has been estimated that 2.566 million m3 storage would provide
additional flows in 4 peak hours.
f. Energy is calculated for the years 1960-2010 on 10-daily basis. The
tailwater elevation varies from 1047.0 to 1055.0 m.a.s.l, and the net head
varies between 225.1 to 234.0 m with an average value of 227.4m.For
the design discharge of 154 cumecs and net head of 227.4 m, the
optimum installed capacity would be 300 MW with average mean annual
energy of 1187.18 GWH, at a plant factor of 45.2%.The calculated annual
300 MW Balakot Hydropower Project
Feasibility Study Report
Executive Summary Page -8

energy, for years 1998 (average year), 1992 (wet year) and 2001 (dry
year), is 1212.38, 1653.12 and 743.64 GWh respectively.
9 DAM AND OTHER HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES
Hydraulic analysis and sizing of the Project structures, has been carried out to the
feasibility level for the following structures:
a. Main Dam
b. Power intake structure on the left bank of the river
c. Low pressure headrace tunnel
d. Surge tank
e. Steel lined vertical pressure shaft
f. High pressure tunnel/penstocks
g. Underground powerhouse with transformer cavern.
h. Free flow tailrace tunnel
9.1 Main Dam
A concrete gravity dam has been planned and designed to pass PMF flood of
5702 cumecs (Drawing BLK-CS-GEN-DWG-012).Five (5) overflow spillway bays,
each having opening of 10.5 m height and10 m width, equipped with hydraulically
operated radial gates for flood discharge are set at the crest level of1276 m.a.s.l.
The dam crest (roadway/bridge deck) level is at El: 1293m.a.s.l. Three (3) circular
bottom outlets of diameter 5.0 m will be provided near the riverbed with the bottom
at El: 1217 m.a.s.l. for sediment flushing. The river bed level at dam axis is 1215
m.a.s.l. and the bedrock is encountered at EL. 1205 m.a.s.l. Height of the main
dam from river bed is 78 m.
9.2 River Diversion Scheme
The river diversion works consist of the following components:
a. Rock fill coffer dam with impervious core and crest level at 1230 m.a.s.l at
the upstream side.
b. Rock fill coffer dam with impervious core and crest level at 1227 m.a.s.l at
the downstream side.
c. A D-shaped diversion tunnel with arch section of 5 m radius and 393 m
long.
9.3 Power Intake Structure
A 3-bay intake structure with trash racks has been proposed for passing the
design discharge. A rectangular 8.0 m wide 8.0m high control gate equipped with
upstream sealing has been provided.
9.4 Low Pressure Headrace Tunnel
Headrace tunnel has been optimized by considering different diameters for the
design discharge with the following parameters:
a. Manning- Stickler coefficient (shotcrete) 60
b. Tunnel slope 0.11 %
c. Shotcrete lining thickness 0.100.3 m (as per conditions)
d. Concrete lining 0.3 m
The optimized dia. of low pressure headrace tunnel is 8.0 m and it is 8420 m long.
300 MW Balakot Hydropower Project
Feasibility Study Report
Executive Summary Page -9

9.5 Vertical Shaft

Vertical shaft has been optimized with the following parameters:
Diameter 5.6m
Length 200 m
9.6 Pressure Tunnel
Pressure tunnel is partially steel lined and has the following dimensions.
Diameter 5.6m
Length 80 m
9.7 Tailrace Tunnel
The data of the main concrete lined tailrace tunnel is as follows:
Total Length 2075 m
Cross section type D shaped
Width 8.0 m
Height 8.0 m
9.8 Head Losses in the Conduit System
The calculation results of the head loss of conduit system indicated that the total
head loss in the conduit system is approx. 13.90 m.
9.9 Surge Tank
A circular surge tank having 12.0 m diameter has been provided at the end of low
pressure headrace tunnel. The surge tank is 80.0 m deep starting from EL.1265
m.a.s.l. and rising up to EL.1345 m.a.s.l.at access opening. Surge tank diameter
throttles to 6.0 m at the junction with headrace tunnel.
9.10 Power Complex
An underground powerhouse has been proposed comprising the following
structures (Drawing DGW-CS-GEN-DWG-013):
a. Underground Powerhouse Cavern
b. GIS Transformer Cavern
c. Main Access Tunnel
d. Cable and Ventilation Tunnel
e. Open Switchyard
The powerhouse cavern is 83.20 m long, 16.2 m wide and 25 m high from the
main inlet valve floor to arch roof crown.
9.10.1 Multi Storied Transformer Cavern
The main features of the transformer hall cavern (L 83.2m x W 23.0m x H 12.8m)
and the factors considered in the determination of the layout are:
a. Single phase generator transformers (3 per unit, plus one spare)will be
placed contained in separate fire-protected enclosure.
b. Transformer transfer facility through rails starting from the unloading bay of
powerhouse at El: 1054 m.a.s.l.
c. Placement of GIS equipment,
d. Facility for transfer of the power cable to cable tunnel.
300 MW Balakot Hydropower Project
Feasibility Study Report
Executive Summary Page -10

9.10.2 Access Tunnel

The access tunnel is the main point of entry to the underground powerhouse
complex. It is sized to accommodate two-way dump truck traffic during
construction, and to provide the space needed to transport heavy equipment on
low bay loaders or multi-wheeled transporters into the caverns. The largest items
to be transported will be the generator transformers, the main inlet valves and the
turbine spiral casing. A D shaped access tunnel of 800 m length and size of
7.0 m width and 8.6 m height with a slope of 10 % is provided.
9.10.3 Cable and Ventilation Tunnel
The cables from transformer cavern are carried through a 4 m x 4 m cable tunnel
up to the open switchyard (100 m x 50 m). This tunnel will also be used for
ventilating transformer and powerhouse caverns. After construction of the
powerhouse roof, the construction adit will be used to ventilate the powerhouse
and connected with the cable tunnel.
10 POWER TRANSMISSION AND INTERCONNECTION STUDIES
The interconnection of the Project to evacuate power of 300 MW is envisaged and
studied in detail as follows:
a. According to National Power System Expansion Plan (NPSEP) of NTDC, a
500 kV double circuit (D/C) line will connect Suki Kinari HPP with Aliot S/S, a
switching station located on the right bank of River Jhelum downstream of
Neelum-Jhelum HPP, where Neelum-Jhelum HPP Gujranwala S/S 500 kV
D/C line will also be looped in-out.
b. Balakot HPP will be connected by looping in-out one circuit of the D/C line of
500 kV from Suki Kinari HPP to Aliot that would be passing near the
powerhouse of the project. The second circuit of 500 kV will connect Naran
HPP to Aliot S/S.
c. The proposed scheme for 500 kV switchyard has double bus-bars of 500 kV
with 04 diameters of breaker-and-half scheme.
Detailed load flow, short circuit and transient stability studies have been
conducted for the project peak load conditions of June 2020 for the
interconnection scheme, as the plant is expected to be commissioned by the end
of year 2019.
A load flow analysis reveals that the scheme is adequate to evacuate the
maximum power of 300 MW under normal and N-1 contingency conditions.
The short circuit analysis shows that the short circuit levels of 500 kV are19.57 kA
and 15.88 kA for 3-phase and 1-phase faults respectively. Therefore, industry
standard switchgear of the short circuit rating of 50 kA would be installed at 500
kV switchyard again sthuge fault current contribution from large future additions to
be connected with the same 500 kV network such as Basha HPP.
The transient stability analysis of the proposed scheme of interconnection has
been carried out. The stability check for the worst case of 3-phase fault right on
the 500 kV bus bar of the substation followed by the final trip of 500 kV circuits
emanating from this substation, has been performed for fault clearing of 5 cycles
(100 ms), as understood to be the normal fault clearing time of 500 kV protection
300 MW Balakot Hydropower Project
Feasibility Study Report
Executive Summary Page -11

system. The system has been found to be strong enough to stay stable and
recovers with fast damping, and therefore passed the transient stability checks.
11 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT STUDIES
The broad objective of ESIA studies is to assess the beneficial and adverse
impacts of the project implementation on the environment including physical,
biological and socio-economic parameters and to mitigate the adverse impacts.
The Project area of the reservoir is under, agriculture, range land with a good
number of forest and fruit trees, mixed shrubs and rough grasses.
There are no industries in and around the project area; therefore, noise pollution is
generally below the EPA limit of 65 dB (A). The air quality in the area is also good.
The environmental and ecological water releases downstream of the dam will be
1.5 cumecs and 3.0 cumecs in winter and summer respectively. In addition to this,
water ranging from 1.60 to 3.10 cumecs in winter and 5.3 to 18.5 cumecs in
summer will also be added through the downstream streams and nullahs.
The flora existing in the Project as well as study areas falls under moist sub-
tropical pine forests generally called Chir forests.
Fauna of the tract consists of mammals, reptiles, amphibians and birds. Some of
the most colourful and beautiful fowls like Monal pheasants and Kaleej are found
in the surrounding mountains.
Archaeological/ historical sites in the reservoir and powerhouse areas do not exist.
The population of the Project area is a mixture of Punjabi, Kashmiri and Pathan.
The major language of project area is Hindko, while Urdu and English are also
used by educated class of the area.
In the Project area, no proper medical facilities exist. Only one dispensary and
some private medical stores are available in Paras village.
Majority (76%) of the female respondents do not take part in any activity except
household chores and livelihood earning is the responsibility of males.
The reservoir of the Project will permanently occupy 127.5 acres of land. Out of
this land, only 23 acre land is irrigated agricultural land whereas 31, 49.5 and 24
acres of land is grazing, barren and under infrastructure respectively. In addition,
area of 10 acre will be occupied for residential colony near the powerhouse site.
In the reservoir area, 4663 trees (1642 forest and 3021 fruit) are being impacted.
There will be no danger to large wildlife with the execution of the project as they
live in forest areas, which are located at higher altitude.
There will be positive impact on the birds and the fowl communities as a suitable
habitat will be formed for this community with the creation of the reservoir.
Construction of the project will result in the creation of job opportunities, better
potential for business, transport and tourism development.
During construction, environmental monitoring will be done for air quality, noise
and vibration, drinking water quality, sewage effluent, solid waste, explosive
material used, hazardous/toxic materials and their proper disposal, flora/fauna,
excavated material and traffic handling system etc.
 300 MW Balakot Hydropower Project
Feasibility Study Report
Executive Summary Page -12

Due to the construction of the project, 164 houses are being affected, which will
require resettlement or compensation. In addition to this, 116 different types of
commercial infrastructure is also being affected due to the reservoir.
All the owners of the land and land based assets will be resettled or compensated
according to the D.C. rates or the rates assessed by the Committee constituted for
this purpose by the D.C. The survey revealed that more than 71.4 % of the
affectees favored cash compensation. A Grievance Redressal Committee (GRC)
is proposed, which will look into all the grievance cases.
The project environmental and resettlement cost amounts to Rs.1100.8 million.
PHYDO will be responsible for the overall implementation of environmental
mitigation measures and the RAP through its Project Director and field offices,
with the collaboration of district government departments.
12 COST ESTIMATES
The cost estimates for the various works including Infrastructure Development and
Site Installations, Civil, Hydro-Mechanical, Hydraulic Steel, Electrical& Substation
have been prepared. These costs include estimates for Environmental Mitigation
Program.
The unit and lump sum prices were adopted after doing the total cost rate analysis
for various items, comparing and escalating the unit prices for certain items
available from other on-going or recently completed similar projects.
Table - 2 presents summary of cost estimates. These estimates do not include the
financial Costs of US$ 17.61 Million.
Table - 2: Summary of Cost Estimates
Total
Sr. Year
Description CostM. US Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
No 5
$
A Infrastructure development, Mitigation and Preparatory works
1 Mobilization and Demobilization 14.42 7.21 0 0 0 7.21
Infrastructure & Technical facilities
including Access Roads, Water
2 supply & Drainage and Power 7.21 7.21 0 0 0 0
supply to Residential colonies at
Dam and Powerhouse sites
Camps and Housing During
3 9.38 9.38 0 0 0 0
Construction
Reservoir Slope Stabilization and
4 2.88 0.46 0.55 0.61 0.61 0.66
Construction Difficulties costs
Sub Total A 33.89 24.26 0.55 0.61 0.61 7.87
B Civil Works
1 Coffer Dams and Diversion Tunnel 11.17 6.7 4.02 0.44 0 0
2 Dam and Plunge pool Excavation 68.64 0 37.75 26.43 4.47 0
3 Power Intake 10.67 0 9.6 1.06 0 0
4 Low Pressure Headrace Tunnel 117.44 17.61 31.71 42.28 25.83 0
5 Surge Shaft 0.54 0 0.05 0.49 0 0
 300 MW Balakot Hydropower Project
Feasibility Study Report
Executive Summary Page -13

Total
Sr. Year
Description CostM. US Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
No 5
$
6 Pressure Shaft 1.32 0 0.13 1.19 0 0
7 High Pressure Tunnel 0.59 0 0 0 0.59 0
8 Penstocks 0.17 0 0 0 0.17 0
9 Powerhouse 25.16 0 16.35 8.81 0 0
10 Tailrace Tunnel 18.01 0 11.71 6.3 0 0
Sub Total B 253.71 24.31 111.32 87 31.06 0
C HSS, Mechanical and Electrical Works
1 Hydraulic Steel Structures 23.76 0 4.75 10.69 8.32 0
2 Powerhouse Mechanical Works 45.54 0 0 11.38 34.15 0
3 Powerhouse Electrical Works 54.94 0 0 0 43.95 10.99
4 Switchyard Works 48.62 0 0 0 48.62 0
5 Transportation 10.89 0 3.81 4.03 2.5 0.54
Sub Total C (FIT and E&C Costs
183.75 0 8.56 26.1 137.54 11.53
included)
D Environmental And Valley Development
1 Valley Development And Uplift 28.94 6 6.94 6 5 5
Environmental Mitigation
2 11 1.76 2.09 2.31 2.31 2.53
Measures
Sub Total D 39.94 7.76 9.03 8.31 7.31 7.53
Sub Total A+B+C+D 511.29 56.33 129.46 122.02 176.52 26.93
Management Consultants
E 33.77 5.1 8.44 8.44 8.44 3.35
Engineering and Supervision
F Contingencies 24.11 4.33 6.27 3.14 5.79 4.58
Miscellaneous (Insurance,
G Performance Bonds and 9.65 1.74 2.51 1.25 2.32 1.83
workman Compensation etc.)
Sub Total A to G 578.82 67.5 146.68 134.85 193.07 36.69
PHYDO Expenses,
H Administration, Counterpart 29.33 5.28 7.63 3.81 7.04 5.57
Staff and Misc Costs
Allowance for greater risk and
I 11.73 2.11 3.05 1.53 2.82 2.23
uncertainties
Total Cost of the Project A to I 619.88 76.36 157.72 139.05 202.37 44.5
J Duties 7.79
Grand Total 627.67

1. Total Foreign Exchange Component (Including Financial Costs)

(A+B+C+E+F+G+17.61M US$) = US$ 556.49 Million.
2. Total Local Component (D+H+I+J) = Pak Rs. 9,429,498,000.00.(9,429.5 million)
3. Total Project Cost in Equivalent Pak Rupees (@ US$ 1.00=Pak Rs 106.20
as on October 15, 2013) is Pak Rs. 68,528,736,000.00. (68,529 Million)
300 MW Balakot Hydropower Project
Feasibility Study Report
Executive Summary Page -14

13 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND CONSTRUCTION PLANNING

Project implementation period is estimated to be 5 years including pre-
construction activities (Figure-5) as summarized below:
14 ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
Economic analysis, carried out on the basis of consumer surplus, indicates that
the proposed investment is feasible as the NPV, at a discount rate of 12%, is 966
M-US$ and the IRR is 25%.
The variation in costs and benefits is reflected in the sensitivity analysis. The
Project is feasible on certain assumptions, and based on robust parameters, it is
feasible on 10% and 20% reduction of benefits and 10% and 20% increase of
costs; and the Project is feasible even if costs increase by 20% and the benefits
reduce by 20%. The switching values at which the Project is feasible occurs when
the gross consumer surplus at the generation level in 9.91c/kwh.
Economics of the Project was verified on the basis of benefits quantified on the
long run marginal costs (LRMC) of capacity, peak energy and off peak energy at
500 KV level. The NPV at 12% discount rate is 797 M. US $ whereas the IRR is
about 23%.
The variation in costs and benefits is reflected in the sensitivity analysis. The
proposed investment seems to be robust as it is economically viable even when
benefits and costs are changed by 20%; even a combined sensitivity with benefits
decreased by 20% and costs increased by 20% still results in a feasible project.
The switching values at which the project is only marginally feasible are firm
capacity 198 $/kw, peak energy 7.61c/kWh and off-peak energy 4.76 c/kWh.
The financial analysis of the Project has been conducted in accordance with the
procedure laid down by ADB Financial Management and Analysis of Projects. All
financial costs and benefits have been expressed at early 2013 constant prices.
Cost streams used for the purposes of FIRR determination (i.e. capital investment,
operation and maintenance, insurance costs and taxes) reflect costs of delivering
the estimated benefits. The NEPRA approved tariff for Suki Kinari, a high head
hydroelectric project, was used to estimate the financial benefits.
The FIRR was calculated as 7.55% for the Project. The overall rate compares
favorably with the estimated WACC of 6.35% substantiating the financial viability
of the Project. The Project is financially feasible.
Risks have been quantified by the sensitivity analysis. The Project is financially
feasible on certain assumptions, and based on robust parameters; it will be able to
stand reasonable uncertainties. The tariff at which the Project becomes feasible is
9.91 c/kWh.
In conclusion, the Project is both economically and financially feasible. The
Project is, however, sensitive to the cost overruns of reduction in tariff. It is
recommended that the Project be implemented after tariff determination by
NEPRA.